Sulpiride and Melatonin Decrease Tinnitus Perception Modulating the Auditolimbic Dopaminergic Pathway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Sulpiride and melatonin decrease dopamine activity. Sulpiride, a D2 antagonist of dopamine receptors, and melatonin, a pineal substance with antidopaminergic action, are administered to tinnitus patients to decrease tinnitus perception. DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study was done. SETTING: General otorhinolaryngologic consultation for 2002-2004 in Seville, Spain. METHODS: One hundred twenty patients consulted for subjective tinnitus. They were included randomly in four groups of 30. One group took sulpiride (50 mg/8 h) alone, the second group took melatonin (3 mg/24 h), the third group took the same doses of sulpiride (50 mg/8 h) plus melatonin (3 mg/24 h), and the fourth group took placebo (lactose 50 mg/8 h), all for 1 month. Ninety-nine patients completed the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical history, tonal audiometry, tympanometry, and tinnitometry were done at the beginning and end of the study. Subjective grading of tinnitus perception and a visual analogue scale (0-10) were done for evaluation of results. RESULTS: Based on the subjective grading, tinnitus perception diminished by 56% in patients treated with sulpiride, by 40% in patients treated with melatonin, by 81% in patients treated with sulpiride plus melatonin, and by 22% in patients treated with placebo. Based on the visual analogue scale, tinnitus perception diminished from 7.7 to 6.3 in patients treated with sulpiride, to 6.5 in those treated with melatonin, to 4.8 in patients treated with sulpiride plus melatonin, and to 7.0 in those treated with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Sulpiride and melatonin reduce tinnitus perception, decreasing dopamine activity. The tinnitus auditolimbic dopaminergic pathway has broad therapeutic implications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".