MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lateral Canal Paroxysmal Positional Vertigo Revisited

2009· article· en· W1968636936 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniele Nuti, Marco Mandalà, Lorenzo Salerni

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNystagmusVertigoBenign paroxysmal positional vertigoSupine positionMedicineSittingAudiologyPathologicalVestibular systemSurgeryInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first reports of an involvement of the lateral canal (LC) in paroxysmal positional vertigo (PPV), were published in 1985, by Luciano Cipparrone et al., from Italy and Joseph McClure from Canada. The increasing interest of otolaryngologists and neurologists has led to a progressive advance in the knowledge of this labyrinthine disorder regarding its epidemiological, physiopathological, clinical, and therapeutic aspects. According to the most recent data, LC-benign PPV accounts for 17% of all PPV patients, regardless of gender and between the two labyrinths. The LC-PPV syndrome is characterized by intense positional vertigo and direction-changing geotropic horizontal nystagmus, both caused by rotation of the head in the supine position. Less frequently, it presents with apogeotropic nystagmus. In some patients nystagmus is also detectable in the sitting position, mimicking a spontaneous nystagmus. In most cases nystagmus is caused by displaced otoconia floating in the semicircular canal. The pathological side, which must be identified for successful treatment, is usually indicated by nystagmus intensity: the more intense positional nystagmus beats toward the affected ear. In a few cases, where there is no difference in nystgmus intensity, other indicators are necessary to determine the pathological side. Vestibular neuritis and posterior fossa lesions should be considered in the differential diagnosis. Treatment of LC-PPV relies on some physical maneuvers, the objective of which is to allow the otoconial debris to exit from the LC by centrifugal inertia and/or by gravitation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations53
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicVestibular and auditory disordersFrench-language works237,207