MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041477257 · doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e3181976a14

Energy Reflectance and Tympanometry in Normal and Otosclerotic Ears

2009· article· en· W2041477257 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEar and Hearing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsLions Gate HospitalVancouver General HospitalAlberta Hip and Knee ClinicMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTympanometryImmittanceOtosclerosisAdmittanceAudiologyReceiver operating characteristicAcousticsMedicineAudiometryElectrical impedanceHearing lossPhysicsElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Objective: The major goal of this study was to examine differences in the middle ear mechano-acoustical properties of normal ears and ears with surgically confirmed otosclerosis using conventional and multifrequency tympanometry (MFT) as well as energy reflectance (ER). Second, we sought to compare ER, standard tympanometry, and MFT in their ability to distinguish healthy and otosclerotic ears examining both overall test performance (sensitivity and specificity) and receiver- operating characteristic analyses. Design: Sixty-two normal-hearing adults and 28 patients diagnosed with otosclerosis served as subjects. Tympanometric data were gathered on a clinical immittance machine, the Virtual 310 equipped with a high-frequency option. Two of the parameters, static admittance and tympanometric width, were measured automatically at a standard 226 Hz frequency. The remaining two parameters, resonant frequency and frequency corresponding to admittance phase angle of 45 degree (F45°), were derived from MFT, multicomponent tympanometry, using a mathematical approach similar to the method used in GSI Tympstar Version 2. ER data were gathered using Mimosa Acoustics (RMS-system v4.0.4.4) equipment. Results: Analyses of receiver-operating characteristic plots confirmed the advantage of MFT measures of resonant frequency and F45° over the standard low-frequency measures of static admittance and tympanometric width with respect to distinguishing otosclerotic ears from normal ears. The F45° measure was also found to be the best single index for making this distinction among tympanometric parameters. ER less than 1 kHz was significantly higher in otosclerotic ears than normal ears. This indicates that most of the incident energy below 1 kHz is reflected back into the ear canal in otosclerotic ears. ER patterns exceeding the 90th percentile of the normal ears across all frequencies correctly identify 82% of the otosclerotic ears while maintaining a low false alarm rate (17.2%); thus, this measure outperforms the other individual tympanometric parameters. Combination of ER and F45° were able to distinguish all otosclerotic ears. Correlations and the individual patterns of test performance revealed that information provided by ER is supplemental to the information provided by conventional and MFT with respect to distinguishing otosclerotic ears from normal ears. Conclusion: The present findings show that the overall changes of ER across frequencies can distinguish otosclerotic ears from normal ears and from other sources of conductive hearing loss. Incorporating ER in general practice will improve the identification of otosclerotic ears when conventional tympanometry and MFT may fail to do so. To further improve the false alarm rate, ER should be interpreted in conjunction with other audiologic test batteries because it is unlikely that signs of a conductive component, including abnormal middle ear muscle reflex and ER responses, would be observed in an ear with normal middle ear function. Sixty-two normal-hearing adults and 28 patients diagnosed with otosclerosis served as subjects. Overall, energy reflectance (ER) in the otosclerotic ears was statistically higher than ER in the normal ears between 400 and 1000 Hz. Analysis of receiver operating characteristic plots revealed that ER is potentially useful in differentiating otosclerotic ears from normal ears. More importantly, comparison of the test performance in individual otosclerotic ears between ER and tympanometric measures revealed that the information provided by ER is supplemental to the information provided by tympanometry. Therefore, combination of tympanometry and ER could potentially improve distinguishing otosclerotic ears from normal ears.

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.

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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.240 · 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