MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109134182 · doi:10.1177/0194599811419082

Oxymetazoline Ototoxicity in a Chinchilla Animal Model

2011· article· en· W2109134182 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sam J. Daniel, Olubunmi V. Akinpelu, Sofia Sahmkow, W. Robert J. Funnell, Fadi Akache

Bibliographic record

VenueOtolaryngology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsChinchillaOtotoxicityOxymetazolineAnimal modelMedicineAudiologyInternal medicineAnatomyChemotherapyAgonist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate possible ototoxic effects of a one-time application of oxymetazoline drops in a chinchilla animal model with tympanostomy tubes. Study Design. A prospective, controlled animal study. SETTING: The Research Institute of the Montreal's Children Hospital, McGill University Health Centre. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Ventilation tubes were inserted in both ears of 12 animals. One ear was randomly assigned to receive oxymetazoline drops (0.5 mL). The contralateral ear did not receive any drops, serving as a control ear. OUTCOME MEASURES: Distortion product otoacoustic emissions were measured bilaterally for a wide range of frequencies (between 1 and 16 kHz) before and 1 day after the application of oxymetazoline in the experimental ears. Two months later, the animals were sacrificed and all cochleae were dissected out and processed for scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: In this established chinchilla animal model, the measured distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes and the morphological appearance on scanning electron microscopy were similar for both control and experimental ears. CONCLUSION: Oxymetazoline did not cause ototoxicity in a chinchilla animal model 2 months after a single application via a tympanostomy tube.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtolaryngologySame topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207