Patients reported outcome post-cochlear implantation: How severe is their dizziness?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The reported prevalence of vestibular dysfunction after cochlear implantation (CI) is varies between different scientific papers. The aim of this study is to determine the reported post-implantation outcome in terms of dizziness, and to measure its impact on quality of life using the Dizziness handicap inventory (DHI). METHODS: This was a prospective questionnaire based study of postoperative cochlear implant patients. The questionnaire assessed the type and onset of dizziness in addition to the DHI. RESULTS: 122 patients were recruited in this study, which is the largest sample size in the literature reported so far. Dizziness was evident in 45.9% of the population post-CI and in 27% pre-CI. The commonest subtype of the dizziness was unsteadiness followed by lightheadedness. The dizziness was mild in most of the patients. CONCLUSION: Although mild, dizziness is a common complaint post-cochlear implantation. An understanding of symptoms helps counsel patients preoperatively.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".