The association between tinnitus and the risk of ischemic cerebrovascular disease in young and middle-aged patients: A secondary case-control analysis of a nationwide, population-based health claims database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tinnitus and ischemic cerebrovascular disease (ICVD) may share common pathophysiologic mechanisms. Nevertheless, no studies have investigated whether tinnitus is associated with a higher risk of ICVD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of ICVD among young and middle-aged patients with tinnitus. METHODS: Using the Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified 3,474 patients 20-45 years old with incident ICVD diagnosed between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2010 and 17,370 controls, frequency matched on age interval, sex, and year of the index date. Risk of ICVD associated with tinnitus was assessed using multiple logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Tinnitus was significantly associated with a higher risk of incident ICVD among young and middle-aged patients (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-2.04), adjusting for sex, age, and comorbidities. In addition, sex-stratified analysis showed that the associations were significant in both male (adjusted OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.16-2.07) and female patients (adjusted OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.30-2.41). Furthermore, tinnitus was significantly associated with a higher risk of ICVD in the 20.0-29.9 years (adjusted OR 4.11, 95% CI 1.98-8.52) and 30.0-39.9 years (adjusted OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.57-3.05) age groups, but not in the 40.0-45.0 years age group. CONCLUSIONS: Tinnitus could be a novel risk factor or clinical indicator for young ischemic stroke, and further investigations are warranted.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".