Ototoxicity monitoring in children treated with platinum chemotherapy
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
OBJECTIVE: To review the prevalence, mechanisms, clinical presentation, risk factors and implications of platinum-induced ototoxicity in paediatric cancer patients based on published evidence, discuss options for monitoring hearing in young children during treatment and review long-term follow-up guidelines. DESIGN: Narrative literature review. RESULTS: Children treated with cisplatin are at high risk of hearing loss and early, accurate identification of ototoxicity is important for medical decision making and hearing rehabilitation. Challenges of monitoring hearing in young children during cancer treatment and options for monitoring hearing are discussed. CONCLUSION: Hearing loss has important consequences for the survivors of childhood cancer including communication, learning, cognition and quality of life. Due to the presentation and configuration of ototoxic hearing loss, the test frequencies that are prioritised and the sequence of testing may differ from standard paediatric hearing evaluations. Hearing should be monitored during treatment and after completion of therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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