MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330298698 · doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e318263d33e

Use of a Microendoscope for Transtympanic Drug Delivery to the Round Window Membrane in Chinchillas

2012· article· en· W2330298698 on OpenAlexaff
Zhoobin A. Mood, Sam J. Daniel

Bibliographic record

VenueOtology & Neurotology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinchillaMedicineRound windowInner earMiddle earDrug deliveryAudiologySurgeryAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Systemic drug application for the treatment of inner ear diseases is restricted because of the blood-labyrinthine barrier and the limited blood supply to the inner ear. Local drug delivery to the inner ear can be an alternative method to overcome the problems with systemic application. The purpose of the present study was to describe the anatomic orientation of the round window membrane (RWM) and to examine the use of a microendoscope for transtympanic drug delivery to the RWM in the chinchilla animal model. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fourteen female chinchillas were used for anatomic dissections (n = 4, 8 ears) and comparison of otomicroscopy (n = 5, 10 ears) with otoendoscopy (n = 5, 10 ears) for visualization and transtympanic application of methylene blue to the RWM of the animals. RESULTS: The external auditory meatus in chinchillas is S-shaped, and the RWM is not accessible through the tympanic membrane in otomicroscopy. The use of a special microendoscope makes it relatively easy to have an accurate transtympanic access to the RWM. The working channel of the microendoscope permitted successful delivery of methylene blue to the RWM in all tested chinchillas. CONCLUSION: The present study is the first published study that shows the feasibility of a microendoscope for transtympanic drug delivery to the RWM in animal models. Minor technical modifications are recommended, which will make the microendoscope an easy tool for future studies on local drug delivery to the RWM in the chinchilla animal model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.240 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOtology & NeurotologySame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207