MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910083364 · doi:10.1159/000490285

Advances in Vestibular Rehabilitation

2019· review· en· W2910083364 on OpenAlex

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

VenueAdvances in oto-rhino-laryngology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVestibular rehabilitationVestibular systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationOscillopsiaContext (archaeology)VertigoRehabilitationMedicineBalance (ability)Vestibular disordersVestibulePsychologyAudiologyPhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vestibular rehabilitation is an exercise-based program that has been in existence for over 70 years. A growing body of evidence supports the use of vestibular rehabilitation in patients with vestibular disorders, and evolving research has led to more efficacious interventions. Through central compensation, vestibular rehabilitation is able to improve symptoms of imbalance, falls, fear of falling, oscillopsia, dizziness, vertigo, motion sensitivity and secondary symptoms such as nausea and anxiety. Early intervention is advised for falls prevention and symptom management; however, symptomatic patients with chronic vestibular disorders may still demonstrate benefit from a course of vestibular rehabilitation. Recent advances in balance and gait training, gaze stability training, habituation training, use of virtual reality, biofeedback, and vestibular prostheses are discussed in this chapter in the context of unilateral and bilateral vestibular disorders.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.332 · 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