Current evidence of peripheral vestibular symptoms secondary to otitis media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The association between otitis media and vestibular symptoms has been hypothesized in the past. Thus, in this study, we aimed to critically analyze (based in a systematic review of the literature) whether patients who have otitis media are at greater risk of developing vestibular impairment or not. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature and identified potentially relevant articles reporting vestibular symptoms and results of vestibular function tests in patients with otitis media through searches of the PubMED, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. The quality of the final set of records was assessed using the "Newcaste-Ottawa Scale". RESULTS: Of the 2334 records searched, 43 met our inclusion and exclusion criteria, and those included 2250 patients. The records comprised 20 longitudinal studies, 21 cross-sectional studies, and 2 case reports. Regarding the type of otitis media studied, 25 examined vestibular impairment in otitis media with effusion, 6 acute otitis media, and 12 chronic otitis media. Results of anamnesis, clinical exams, and several vestibular function tests are reported and critically discussed. CONCLUSION: Most studies evaluating the association between otitis media and vestibular symptoms have potential methodological flaws. Clinical evidence suggests that patients with otitis media have increased chances for having vestibular symptoms, delayed acquisition of developmental milestones, and abnormalities in several vestibular function tests as compared with controls. Future studies with rigorous methodology aiming to assess the clinical significance (and prognostic factors) of the association between otitis media and vestibular impairment are warranted. Key message Several studies demonstrated long-term sequelae secondary to otitis media. However, the evidence supporting those assumptions are based in low-quality evidence. Thus, better structured studies are warranted to better understand the clinical relevance of such association.
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 | 0.011 | 0.088 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".