Vestibular-Evoked Myogenic Potentials as a Test of Otolith Function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use of 75 auditory clicks rather than the usual 100-256 for production of the vestibular-evoked myogenic potential (VEMP) response and to assess if the VEMP correlates with measures of cochlear function such as hearing loss (decibels on pure-tone testing) or auditory brainstem response (ABR). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Testing of the VEMP was carried out on 24 subjects: 7 normal individuals and 13 hard-of-hearing patients, 2 patients with known vestibular lesions, 1 with profound sensorineural hearing loss and 1 patient with unilateral acoustic neuroma prior to resection. The recording was performed using a conventional ABR machine. Using 75 refraction clicks as auditory stimuli, VEMP responses were measured from a surface electrode applied to the sternocleidomastoid muscle. The 75 responses were averaged. RESULTS: A consistent unilateral biphasic response, the first negative and the second positive (nI, pII), was elicited from 39 of 40 ears (7 normal and 13 hard-of-hearing subjects with no known vestibular dysfunction). No statistical difference was found between the right and left ear responses for nI or pII wave latencies. Two patients with loss of peripheral vestibular function showed no VEMP responses on the affected side. The responses, however, were elicited bilaterally in a patient with congenital profound sensorineural hearing loss. In addition, ABR latencies did not correlate with VEMP latencies. CONCLUSION: Clear VEMP responses were elicited by using only 75 auditory clicks. This shortens the testing time and facilitates the procedure for the tested subject. Our data also indicate that the VEMP is generated secondary to auditory stimulation of the vestibular end organs (specifically the saccule) and does not correlate with cochlear function.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".