Polysomnographic and quantitative electroencephalographic correlates of subjective sleep complaints in chronic tinnitus
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic tinnitus, or the perception of hearing sounds without the presence of external stimulation, is estimated at about 10-15% of the population, with highest prevalence after 50 years of age. Sleep complaints are among the most prominent complaints accompanying tinnitus, but objective data are rare. In this study, we examined prospectively the subjective and objective sleep parameters of this patient population in order to determine differences in sleep disturbances associated with chronic tinnitus compared to matched controls. Forty-four subjects (22 with tinnitus and 22 controls without tinnitus), unselected with respect to sleep complaints, participated in this study. The analysis involved 1-week sleep diaries, subjective sleep questionnaires and 1 night of polysomnographic (PSG) assessment. Compared to matched controls, the tinnitus group showed lower subjective sleep quality as measured with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and sleep diaries, but no significant difference in objective polysomnograph sleep parameters (i.e. sleep latency, efficiency). However, quantitative non-rapid eye movement sleep analysis revealed lower spectral power in the delta frequency band in the tinnitus group compared to controls, and this decrease was correlated with subjective sleep complaints (the lower the delta spectral power, the greater the complaints). This is the first report of an electrophysiological correlate of sleep difficulties supportive of subjective sleep complaints in the tinnitus population.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it