Ototoxicity of Topical Ciprofloxacin/Dexamethasone otic Suspension in a Chinchilla Animal Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the ototoxic potential of ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone eardrops. METHODS: Ventilation tubes were inserted in the ears of 15 chinchillas. One ear was randomized to receive four drops of ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone. A control solution (0.45% NaCl) was applied in the contralateral ear. The eardrops were delivered twice daily for 7 consecutive days. Auditory brain stem response (ABR) measurements were recorded at baseline (post-tympanostomy tube insertion), and on days 4, 8, 15, 22, and 60. RESULTS: An initial transient increase of 8.11 dB nHL was noted in the mean thresholds of the experimental ears at day 4. On the last ABR evaluation (day 60), the mean thresholds were 16.33 +/- 6.93 dB nHL in the experimental ears and 13.66 +/- 6.65 dB nHL in the control ears. The difference in the mean thresholds between the experimental and control ears at day 60 was not significant (95% confidence interval, 3.12, -8.02). Scanning electron microscopy demonstrated normal morphology in all experimental ears that were assessed. CONCLUSION: Ciprofloxacin/dexamethasone eardrops did not appear ototoxic when used in chinchillas post-ventilation tube insertion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".