MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315410942 · doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e3182804784

From Nucleus 24 to 513

2013· article· en· W2315410942 on OpenAlexaff
Karen A. Gordon, Blake C. Papsin

Bibliographic record

VenueOtology & Neurotology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCochlear implantAudiologyCochlear nerveImplantCochlear nucleusElectrode arrayBasal (medicine)ElectrodeCochleaNucleusSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We asked how thresholds of auditory activity evoked by a recent research cochlear implant, the Nucleus 513, compared with those evoked by previous generations of devices from the same manufacturer. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective repeated measures. SETTING: Tertiary pediatric hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 182 children receiving unilateral or bilateral Nucleus cochlear implants. INTERVENTIONS: Of 182 children, 39 received the N24M straight array, the oldest device in this study, 20 received the N24RCS Contour, the next device released, 57 received the 24RE Freedom, released after the N24RCS, and 66 received the N513 Leap electrode array, the newest device. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Behavioral thresholds and auditory nerve response thresholds were evoked by an apical, mid-array, and basal electrode and measured in 203 ears. RESULTS: In general, auditory nerve thresholds decreased with newer devices. Responses evoked by the mid-array electrode had higher thresholds than responses to the other electrodes in most devices and highest in the operating room for the N513. Apical electrodes evoked the lowest thresholds at the level of the auditory nerve. Auditory nerve response thresholds decreased from the operating room to initial device activation with the 2 newest devices (N24RE and N513) tending to show the largest changes. Behavioral thresholds were at lowest levels for the 2 newest devices studied and, unlike auditory nerve response thresholds, decreased with age for all devices. CONCLUSION: Evolving cochlear implant electrode design significantly affects auditory thresholds, but these changes do not occur uniformly along the array.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.008

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.254 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtology & NeurotologySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207