MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106983493 · doi:10.1080/14992020701711029

Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) in Caucasian and Chinese young adults

2008· article· en· W2106983493 on OpenAlexafffund
Navid Shahnaz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Audiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersOklahoma Agricultural Experiment StationUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsAudiologyOtoacoustic emissionMedicineHearing lossYoung adultInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this study was to examine the effect of race and gender on transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) characteristics. TEOAE amplitude, noise levels, and hearing thresholds were compared in 81 Caucasian (mean age: 27.8 years) and 81 Chinese (mean age: 24.7 years) young adults with normal hearing. TEOAE amplitude was significantly higher in females than males and in the Chinese group than the Caucasian group. Females had better hearing sensitivity than males consistent with TEOAE results. Hearing sensitivity was not statistically different between the two racial groups; however, the interaction between race and hearing thresholds was significant. As the noise levels between the two racial groups were not statistically different, the observed differences are most likely related to differences in middle-ear transmission properties or to differences in cochlear mechanisms. Documentation of gender and racial differences and understanding the underlying mechanism of these differences will not only assist us in understanding how TEOAE will be affected by middle-ear transmission properties but also will help us in establishing normative data in clinical settings.

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)0.002
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 score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AudiologySame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207