Skin Breakdown over Cochlear Implants: Prevention of a Magnet Site Complication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of inflammation of the skin around the magnet of cochlear implants. METHOD: A postal survey of 232 children implanted at The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, detailing the timing and severity of skin inflammation near the magnet. RESULTS: Sixty-three children (27%) had at least one episode of skin erythema at the magnet site. In most cases, this resolved after reducing magnet field strength. Nine children stopped wearing the device briefly, and five were treated with antibiotics. Skin ulceration occurred in two cases. No surgical treatment was required. Reactions tended to occur in younger children (2.8 vs 4.3 years; p = .002, Mann-Whitney rank sum test). CONCLUSIONS: Skin inflammation commonly occurs in children between magnets of the transmitter and receiver coils of a cochlear implant. If inflammation fails to resolve after loosening the magnet, use of the implant should be discontinued temporarily. Antibiotics should be prescribed for cellulitis to prevent an implant-threatening infection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".