Bilateral Cholesteatomas: The Hospital for Sick Children Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article is to review the cases of bilateral cholesteatomas in a tertiary care pediatric otolaryngology department. We compare the presenting signs and symptoms and timing of ipsilateral and contralateral cholesteatomas and the initial audiometric findings. METHODS: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Department of Otolaryngology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with bilateral cholesteatomas were accrued. Nine patients had bilateral congenital cholesteatomas and presented at a substantially younger age than those with acquired disease (average of 5 years, 9 months vs 11 years). Sixteen of the 22 patients were initially diagnosed with bilateral cholesteatomas. The majority of the remaining patients had evidence on initial assessment of contralateral middle ear disease. A particular subset of patients with severe disease requiring numerous bilateral revision surgeries was also identified. These patients also underwent revision surgery after a substantially shorter follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral cholesteatomas in the pediatric population are extremely rare. Bilateral congenital cholesteatomas are more common in males, whereas bilateral acquired cholesteatomas are more common in females. The outcome is generally poor. A small subset with particularly aggressive disease requires many more bilateral revision surgeries at an earlier period when compared with the remainder of the group.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".