MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558026118 · doi:10.1002/lary.26394

Intratympanic dexamethasone in sudden sensorineural hearing loss: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2016· review· en· W2558026118 on OpenAlex
Nagi G. El Sabbagh, Maida Sewitch, Aren Bezdjian, Sam J. Daniel

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Laryngoscope · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDexamethasoneAudiologySudden Hearing LossMedicineSensorineural hearing lossHearing lossMeta-analysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Systemic dexamethasone has demonstrated conclusive benefits in reversing sudden sensorineural hearing loss (SSNHL) despite considerable number of potential side effects. In contrast, the intratympanic route of steroid administration averts several possible complications. This study aims to examine the literature to delineate the efficacy and side effect of intratympanic dexamethasone (ITD) injection for the treatment of SSNHL. DATA SOURCE: Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE electronic databases from January 1950 to August 2014, with an update performed on November 10, 2014. REVIEW METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCCTs), using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram and guidelines. Quality assessment was performed using The Cochrane Collaboration Tool for Assessing Risk of Bias. RESULTS: Eight RCCTs on SSNHL were included Three of the eight studies had high risk of bias. Substantial heterogeneity was found. The meta-analysis failed to detect statistically significant difference between ITD and alternative treatment (odds ratio = 0.39, 95% credible intervals = 0.11-1.27). The side-effects profile was favorable for ITD. No serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSION: There is no sufficient scientific evidence to support a difference between ITD and alternative therapy for SSNHL. We recommend larger RCCTs to determine the effectiveness of ITD compared to oral steroid therapy. We encourage a shift in study design selection toward noninferiority or superiority studies. Avoiding systemic corticotherapy, especially in vulnerable populations, should be the rationale for future research in the field. Laryngoscope, 127:1897-1908, 2017.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.252 · 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