MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Temporal Bone Findings on Computed Tomography Imaging in Branchio-Oto-Renal Syndrome

2005· article· en· W1980583241 on OpenAlexaff
Evan J. Propst, Susan Blasér, Karen A. Gordon, Robert V. Harrison, Blake C. Papsin

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Anomalies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemporal boneMedicineCochleaEar canalCoronal planeRadiologyTomographyComputed tomographyMagnetic resonance imagingAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To describe temporal bone findings using visual inspection and direct measurement on computerized tomography (CT) in individuals with branchio-oto-renal syndrome (BOR). We ask if it is possible for the untrained observer to use a battery of CT observations as a tool in the overall evaluation of the BOR phenotype. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective evaluation of CT findings in individuals with a clinical diagnosis of BOR based on criteria derived from genotype-phenotype analyses. METHODS: Prospective measurement of temporal bone CT imaging in 21 individuals (42 ears) with BOR and 21 normally hearing controls (21 ears) was performed. Thirty-nine aspects of each temporal bone were evaluated: 17 by direct measurement, 5 computed from direct measurement, and 17 by visual inspection. Thirty-eight recordings from each ear were made on axial section and 1 was made on coronal section. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences were found between BOR and control groups in 30 of 39 categories (76.9%). The most common and easily identifiable characteristics of BOR by visual inspection were 1) hypoplastic apical turn of the cochlea, 2) facial nerve deviated to the medial side of the cochlea, 3) funnel-shaped internal auditory canal, and 4) patulous eustachian tube. The embryological origin of temporal bone anomalies in BOR are described. CONCLUSIONS: CT evaluation of the temporal bone, when properly investigated, should be used as an important tool in the overall evaluation of the BOR phenotype.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations69
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe LaryngoscopeSame topicHead and Neck AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207