Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to offer a concise summary of current knowledge regarding hidden hearing loss (HHL) and to describe the variety of mechanisms that contribute to its development. We will also discuss the various diagnostic tools that are available as well as future directions. RECENT FINDINGS: Hidden hearing loss often also called cochlear synaptopathy affects afferent synapses of the inner hair cells. This description is in contrast to traditional models of hearing loss, which predominantly affects auditory hair cells. In HHL, the synapses of nerve fibres with a slow spontaneous firing rate, which are crucial for locating sound in background noise, are severely impaired. In addition, recent research suggests that HHL may also be related to cochlear nerve demyelination. Noise exposure causes loss of myelin sheath thickness. Auditory brainstem response, envelope-following response and middle-ear muscle reflex are promising diagnostic tests, but they have yet to be validated in humans. SUMMARY: Establishing diagnostic tools for cochlear synaptopathy in humans is important to better understand this patient population, predict the long-term outcomes and allow patients to take the necessary protective precautions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".