The Role of Vestibular Caloric Tests in Cochlear Implantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Vestibular function tests are often undertaken before cochlear implantation, in part to help select the side of surgery. The authors aim to determine whether implantation on the side of better vestibular function leads to greater perception of dizziness by patients than implantation on the side of worse or similar function. STUDY DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary cochlear implantation center. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The records of 177 adult recipients of a unilateral cochlear implant were reviewed retrospectively in 2 groups. Group A included patients with an implant in the ear with worse or similar caloric responses. Group B included patients with an implant in the ear with the stronger caloric response. All patients underwent preoperative bithermal caloric testing: a clinically significant difference was defined by a 20% lateral canal paresis. They were assessed postoperatively by the Dizziness Handicap Inventory and supplementary questions. RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of both groups reported dizziness in the first 7 days postoperatively. At 2 months, 20% of group A and 34% of group B experienced some dizziness. Fourteen percent of group A and 10% of group B felt that cochlear implantation had resulted in impaired balance. The Dizziness Handicap Inventory scores of 86% of group A (median score 0) and 76% of group B (median score 10) corresponded with low handicap. None of these results differed significantly between groups A and B. CONCLUSION: Although cochlear implantation may result in dizziness, it is almost always short-lived and mild, even when the ear with the stronger caloric response is implanted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".