Tinnitus: pathology of synaptic plasticity at the cellular and system levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite being more and more common, and having a high impact on the quality of life of sufferers, tinnitus does not yet have a cure. This has been mostly the result of limited knowledge of the biological mechanisms underlying this adverse pathology. However, the last decade has witnessed tremendous progress in our understanding on the pathophysiology of tinnitus. Animal models have demonstrated that tinnitus is a pathology of neural plasticity, and has two main components: a molecular, peripheral component related to the initiation phase of tinnitus; and a system-level, central component-related to the long-term maintenance of tinnitus. Using the most recent experimental data and the molecular/system dichotomy as a framework, we describe here the biological basis of tinnitus. We then discuss these mechanisms from an evolutionary perspective, highlighting similarities with memory. Finally, we consider how these discoveries can translate into therapies, and we suggest operative strategies to design new and effective combined therapeutic solutions using both pharmacological (local and systemic) and behavioral tools (e.g., using tele-medicine and virtual reality settings).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".