Risk of developing sudden sensorineural hearing loss in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A population‐based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to explore the risk of developing of sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSHL) in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: A population-based, retrospective cohort study using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database was conducted. From 2001 to 2006, 9121 patients with newly diagnosed NPC and 45,605 comparison subjects without NPC were selected. The incidence of SSHL at the end of 2009 was determined. RESULTS: The incidence of SSHL was 6.53-fold higher in the NPC group compared to the non-NPC group (p < .001). Using Cox proportional hazard regressions, the risk of developing SSHL increased with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 6.747 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 5.366-8.484) in patients with NPC compared with patients without NPC. CONCLUSION: NPC was significantly associated with an increased risk of developing SSHL. The risk of developing SSHL increased over follow-up time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".