Skip to main content

Table 3 Mediation of the cohort difference in high frequency hearing thresholds (3, 4 and 6 kHz)

From: Explaining better hearing in Norway: a comparison of two cohorts 20 years apart - the HUNT study

  Cohort effecta Natural indirect effect
Estimate (dB) 95% CI Estimate (dB) 95% CI Mediated proportion
All:
 Total −2.97 − 2.76, − 3.18 −0.82b − 0.94, − 0.70 0.28
 Education    −0.12c −0.22, − 0.02 0.04
 Recurrent ear infections    −0.20c −0.23, − 0.16 0.07
 Occupational noise    −0.25e −0.30, − 0.20 0.08
 Smoking    −0.14e −0.24, − 0.04 0.05
Women:
 Total −1.25 −1.00, − 1.50 −0.68b − 0.82, − 0.53 0.54
 Education    −0.30c −0.44, − 0.16 0.24
 Recurrent ear infections    −0.21c −0.26, − 0.16 0.17
 Occupational noise    −0.06d −0.08, − 0.04 0.05
 Smoking    −0.08d −0.13, − 0.04 0.07
Men:
 Total −5.20 −4.85, −5.55 −1.39b −1.61, − 1.18 0.27
 Education    −0.35c −0.47, − 0.22 0.07
 Recurrent ear infections    −0.17c −0.23, − 0.11 0.03
 Occupational noise    −0.56e −0.71, − 0.42 0.11
 Smoking    −0.17e −0.37, 0.03 0.03
  1. All models were adjusted for age and sex
  2. a Difference in hearing thresholds between HUNT4 (2017–2018) and HUNT2 (1996–1998)
  3. b Estimated by fitting natural effect models in the R-package medflex using the imputation method including all exposure-mediation interaction terms
  4. c Estimated with gformula in Stata
  5. d Estimated with gformula in Stata with the assumption of no exposure mediation interaction as proposed by Robins and Greenland [32]
  6. e Estimated with gformula in Stata with the assumption of no exposure intermediate interaction together with only linear effects of the intermediate variable as proposed by Petersen et al. [33]