The effects of oral isotretinoin (13-Cis retinoic acid) on the inner ear: A prospective clinical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of oral isotretinoin, a drug used in the treatment of acne vulgaris, on hearing function determined by serial audiology examinations. METHODS: Forty patients with acne vulgaris were included in this study. Nine patients were excluded from the study because of inconsistent follow-up. The hearing of each participant was tested with pure tone audiometry and transient evoked autoacoustic emissions before and two and four weeks after treatment with isotretinoin (0.3-0.6 mg/kg/day) in the remaining 31 patients (62 ears). RESULTS: The differences between the mean values of the pre-treatment and post-treatment pure tone hearing thresholds at 1000, 2000, 4000 and 6000 Hz frequencies were statistically significant (p < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the pre-treatment and post-treatment values at 250 and 500 Hz frequencies (p > 0.05). The difference between the pre-treatment and post-treatment signal-noise ratio values of the transient evoked autoacoustic emissions was not significantly different (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the use of isotretinoin may cause bilateral hearing threshold changes. Further animal and human studies are required to investigate and characterize isotretinoin-induced neurophysiological alterations in hearing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".