MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896727245 · doi:10.1177/0003489418806922

Pilot Study Assessing the Feasibility and Clinical Outcomes of Office-Based Ossiculoplasty

2018· article· en· W2896727245 on OpenAlexaff
Nael Shoman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Otology Rhinology & Laryngology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSupine positionSurgerySedationLocal anesthesiaAnesthesiaPerforationBone conductionAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES:: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and safety of ossiculoplasty under local anesthesia in an office setting without sedation. METHODS:: Between May 2017 and November 2017, patients who presented with conductive hearing loss and known isolated ossicular discontinuities were offered ossiculoplasty under local anesthesia. Inclusion criteria included age ⩾ 18 years, adequate transcanal access, and the ability to lie supine for up to 45 minutes. Exclusion criteria included associated tympanic membrane perforation and the presence of middleear or mastoid cholesteatoma or infection. RESULTS:: Fourteen patients underwent the procedure. The mean age was 48.3 years (range, 19-74 years). Six were primary and 8 revision cases. There were 8 partial and 6 total prosthesis placements. The mean operative time was 34 minutes (range, 26-43 minutes). All patients tolerated the procedure to completion. There were no intraoperative complications. The mean air conduction pure-tone average was 76.6 dB and the mean bone conduction pure-tone average was 27.2 dB, with a preoperative air-bone gap of 49.9 dB. Air conduction pure-tone average significantly improved to 45.2 dB ( P < .0001). Air-bone gap significantly improved to 17.8 dB ( P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS:: Ossiculoplasty using partial or total prostheses can be safely performed in the office setting under local anesthesia without sedation in carefully selected patients. This has potentially significant patient and system benefits.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Otology Rhinology & LaryngologySame topicEar Surgery and Otitis MediaFrench-language works237,207