MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022541310 · doi:10.1001/archoto.2007.16

A Test of Static and Dynamic Balance Function in Children With Cochlear Implants

2008· article· en· W2022541310 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon L. Cushing, Ruth Chia, Adrian L. James, Blake C. Papsin, Karen A. Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic balanceAudiologyBalance (ability)Cochlear implantTest (biology)Balance testMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the incidence of static and dynamic balance dysfunction in a group of children with profound sensorineural hearing loss receiving a cochlear implant and to assess the impact of cochlear implant activation on equilibrium. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional study of children with single-sided implants, tested under 2 conditions: (1) implant on and (2) implant off in a random order. SETTING: Ambulatory setting within an academic, tertiary care children's hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-one children (ages 4-17 years) with cochlear implants comprised the study group. Fourteen children with normal hearing served as controls. INTERVENTION: All participants performed a standardized test of static and dynamic balance function (Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency 2 [BOT2], balance subset). Children with implants performed the BOT2 under the 2 randomized conditions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall performance on the balance subset of the BOT2 and the influence of implant activation on performance. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age-adjusted scale score for our control group was 17 (5) points (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-20), which was not significantly different (P = .15) from the published age-adjusted mean for the BOT2 balance subset (15 [5] points). The group that had undergone implantation, however, performed significantly more poorly (12 [ 6] points; 95% CI, 10-14) than either the control group or the published test mean (P = .004). Children with implants performed better with their implants on than with their implants off (mean [SD] difference, 1.3 [2.7] points; 95% CI, 0.3-2.3; P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Large differences exist in the balance ability of children with sensorineural hearing loss requiring cochlear implantation compared with age-matched controls. Implant activation, however, conferred a slight advantage in accomplishing balance-related tasks. These results substantiate the need to further quantify the baseline vestibular dysfunction of our study population of children with cochlear implants, as well as the impact of implant activation on the input and output of the vestibular system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.287

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations122
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck SurgerySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207