Does N‐acetylcysteine Improve Established Hearing Loss in Guinea Pigs?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess whether multiple injections of a powerful antioxidant can improve established sensorineural hearing loss in guinea pigs. Study Design Animal study. Setting Animal science laboratory, University of Manitoba. Methods A total of 16 guinea pigs were used in our study: 8 underwent unilateral intracochlear neomycin injection, and 8 underwent unilateral saline to serve as controls. After a period of 3 weeks for hearing loss to stabilize, 4 guinea pigs from each group received weekly intraperitoneal injections of N‐acetylcysteine (NAC) for 4 weeks. Click auditory brainstem response (ABR) testing was conducted at baseline, weekly after the start of NAC injections, and after the last injection. Pure tone ABR tests were conducted prior to intracochlear injections and at completion of the study. Results Click ABR thresholds were significantly worse in ears treated with neomycin ( P <. 001), as expected, but not significantly different when treated with NAC ( P =. 664). Thresholds for pure tone ABR were also not statistically different in neomycin‐treated ears with or without NAC ( P >. 99). Conclusions The aggressive antioxidant therapy performed in this study was not successful in improving established hearing loss via an antioxidant regimen that is known to change the oxidation‐reduction potential in the cochlea.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".