MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1961831270 · doi:10.3389/fncir.2015.00067

Frequency-specific alternations in the amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations in chronic tinnitus

2015· article· en· W1961831270 on OpenAlexaff
Yu‐Chen Chen, Wenqing Xia, Bin Luo, Vijaya Prakash Krishnan Muthaiah, Zhenyu Xiong, Jian Zhang, Jian Wang, Richard Salvi, Gao‐Jun Teng

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neural Circuits · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceMinistry of Science and Technology of the People's Republic of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTinnitusNeuroscienceAudiologyAmplitudePsychologyPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tinnitus, a phantom ringing, buzzing, or hissing sensation with potentially debilitating consequences, is thought to arise from aberrant spontaneous neural activity at one or more sites within the central nervous system; however, the location and specific features of these oscillations are poorly understood with respect to specific tinnitus features. Recent resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies suggest that aberrant fluctuations in spontaneous low-frequency oscillations (LFO) of the blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal may be an important factor in chronic tinnitus; however, the role that frequency-specific components of LFO play in subjective tinnitus remains unclear. A total of 39 chronic tinnitus patients and 41 well-matched healthy controls participated in the resting-state fMRI scans. The LFO amplitudes were investigated using the amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation (ALFF) and fractional ALFF (fALFF) in two different frequency bands (slow-4: 0.027-0.073 Hz and slow-5: 0.01-0.027 Hz). We observed significant differences between tinnitus patients and normal controls in ALFF/fALFF in the two bands (slow-4 and slow-5) in several brain regions including the superior frontal gyrus (SFG), inferior frontal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus, angular gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, and middle occipital gyrus. Across the entire subject pool, significant differences in ALFF/fALFF between the two bands were found in the midbrain, basal ganglia, hippocampus and cerebellum (Slow 4 > Slow 5), and in the middle frontal gyrus, supramarginal gyrus, posterior cingulate cortex, and precuneus (Slow 5 > Slow 4). We also observed significant interaction between frequency bands and patient groups in the orbitofrontal gyrus. Furthermore, tinnitus distress was positively correlated with the magnitude of ALFF in right SFG and the magnitude of fALFF slow-4 band in left SFG, whereas tinnitus duration was positively correlated with the magnitude of ALFF in right SFG and the magnitude of fALFF slow-5 band in left SFG. Resting-state fMRI provides an unbiased method for identifying aberrant spontaneous LFO occurring throughout the central nervous system. Chronic tinnitus patients have widespread abnormalities in ALFF and fALFF slow-4 and slow-5 band which are correlated with tinnitus distress and duration. These results provide new insights on the neuropathophysiology of chronic tinnitus; therapies capable of reversing these aberrant patterns may reduce tinnitus distress.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.973

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations59
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Neural CircuitsSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207