MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951575429 · doi:10.2196/14519

The Presence of Physical Symptoms in Patients With Tinnitus: International Web-Based Survey

2019· article· en· W2951575429 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Michiels, Stephen Harrison, Markku Vesala, Winfried Schlee

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Journal of Medical Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTinnitusMedicineHyperacusisAudiologyAnxietyPopulationPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tinnitus, or ringing in the ears, is a phantom perception of sound in the absence of overt acoustic stimulation. Many patients indicate that the perception of their tinnitus is not constant and can vary from moment to moment. This tinnitus fluctuation is one of the diagnostic criteria for somatosensory tinnitus (ST), a tinnitus subtype that is influenced by cervical spine or temporomandibular dysfunctions, although various factors have been reported to cause fluctuations in tinnitus, such as stress, anxiety, and physical activity. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was twofold: (1) to investigate the presence of physical symptoms in a large group of participants with tinnitus and (2) to investigate if these physical symptoms are more frequently present in a subgroup of participants with ST. METHODS: A Web-based survey, questioning the presence of physical symptoms in a convenience sample of participants with tinnitus, was launched on the online forum, Tinnitus Talk, managed by Tinnitus Hub. After a general analysis of the physical symptoms present in our survey population, we further analyzed the group of participants who were diagnosed by a physician (n=1262). This subgroup was divided into 2 groups, one group diagnosed with ST and another group diagnosed with other types of tinnitus. RESULTS: In total, 6115 participants with a mean age of 54.08 years (SD 13.8) completed the survey. Physical symptoms were frequently present in our sample of participants with tinnitus: 4221 participants (69.02%) reported some form of neck pain, 429 (7.01%) were diagnosed with temporomandibular disorders, 2730 (44.64%) indicated they have bruxism, and between 858 and 1419 (14.03%-23.20%) participants were able to modulate their tinnitus by voluntary movements. ST was diagnosed in 154 out of 1262 (12.20%) participants whose tinnitus cause was diagnosed by a physician. Symptoms referring to the known diagnostic criteria were evidently more present in the ST group than in the non-ST group. Additionally, participants with ST more often indicated a negative effect of a bad night's sleep (P=.01) and light intensity exercise (P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity and movement (disorders) frequently affect tinnitus severity. Head-neck related symptoms are more frequently reported in the ST group, as is the ability to modulate the tinnitus by head or jaw movements. Additionally, participants with ST more often report fluctuations of their tinnitus and reaction to sleeping difficulties and low intensity exercise.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.364 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Journal of Medical ResearchSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207