Do Otoliths Modulate Caloric Response? What Do Vemps and Cdp Measure? What Do These Tests Tell Us?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: it has been documented in the literature that caloric responses with the lateral semicircular canal in a horizontal position are reduced, but not absent.This paper addresses what contributions to the caloric response, if any are made by the otoliths, and what influences on caloric response might be seen in patients with otolithic pathology. Study design: a prospective case series study.Setting: Tertiary and quaternary care teaching hospital.Patients: two normal subjects underwent "horizontal" calorics to document caloric response with the lateral semicircular canal in the horizontal position.This assessment was also carried out on eight sequential patients who were documented to have otolithic disease (as evidenced by abnormal VEMP assessment).Interventions: Two sets of caloric tests (standard and horizontal) were carried out on our subjects.Patients underwent identical caloric assessment after CVEMP and OVEMP assessment.Main outcome measures: VEMPs were scored as either normal or abnormal for each parameter we assess.Calorics were scored using the standard slow phase velocity measurements for each one.Results: Patients with otolithic abnormalities showed different caloric results in the horizontal position than is suggested in the literature and was shown by our two normal subjects.Conclusion: Caloric responses are modulated and in patients with otolithic pathology, semicircular canal function is modulated, as caloric responses are different in patients than in normals when the superior semicircular canal orientation to gravity is changed.Our results suggest that the otoliths do in fact mediate caloric responses.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".