Down syndrome: An electrophysiological and radiological profile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To assess the hearing status of trisomy 21 patients by analyzing electrophysiological and radiological findings of any correlation between hearing impairment and major or minor inner ear malformations. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective radiological and electrophysiological study. METHODS: A group of 34 ears of Down syndrome subjects and 20 ears of a volunteer age- and sex-matched control group of 10 normal subjects were studied electrophysiologically by means of otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem response. Temporal bone computed tomography (CT) scans were carried out in both groups; radiological findings were compared. Inner ear structure measurements were applied attempting to disclose subtle bony labyrinthine anomalies. The findings from both groups were statistically analyzed employing the t test. RESULTS: The rate of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in Down syndrome group was 41%. Temporal bone CT scans showed no ossicular malformation in all Down syndrome cases. Major inner ear abnormalities were disclosed in 5.8%; they corresponded to two cases of lateral semicircular canal dysplasia detected on CT images by visual inspection. The application of various inner ear structure measurements increased the overall detection rate of common inner ear malformations to 47%. A statistically significant correlation was found between hearing level and vestibule length (P = .009) and internal auditory canal length (P = .028). Vestibular aqueduct width was correlated to different otic abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS: SNHL is mainly secondary to the underestimated subtle inner ear malformations that are adequately demonstrated by adopting standardized inner ear structure measurements on petrous bone imaging. Vestibular height and internal auditory canal length were correlated to SNHL. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".