MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Medial Canal Fibrosis: Surgical Technique, Results, and a Proposed Grading System

2005· article· en· W2008830163 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Yu-Wen Lin, Gerard H. Chee, Joseph M. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueOtology & Neurotology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGrading (engineering)Radiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To report the hearing and surgical results in patients with medial canal fibrosis. To describe the surgical technique for removal of medial canal fibrosis and to propose a classification for grading postoperative surgical outcome and to correlate this with hearing results. SETTING: Tertiary university referral center. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with mature medial canal fibrosis underwent a total of 26 operations at our institution from February 1994 to June 2003. Four patients underwent surgery for bilateral disease and another had a second operation for recurrence. RESULTS: According to the proposed grading system, 10 (38.5%) of the 29 ears operated on achieved a Grade I result (normal self-cleaning ears) and three (11.5%) had recurrence (Grade III). One patient was found to have external ear canal cholesteatoma. Postoperatively, 15 ears demonstrated closure of the air-bone gap to within 10 dB or improvement on four-frequency average pure-tone audiogram to better than 25 dB. The mean preoperative air-bone gap was 28.7 dB compared with 12.5 dB postoperatively (p < 0.001). When hearing results were correlated with postoperative grade, 90.0% of the ears with a Grade I result had significant hearing improvement, 46.2% in patients with Grade II and 33.3% in patients with Grade III results. Four patients complained of temporomandibular joint pain postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Surgery remains the treatment of choice for mature medial canal fibrosis. With proper surgical technique and meticulous postoperative care, a patent and functioning external ear canal can be achieved in a majority of patients. Absence of recurrence does not equate with improved hearing thresholds.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtology & NeurotologySame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207