When Can Children Perform Valsalva and Toynbee Maneuvers? An Exploratory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Barochallenge-induced Eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) is difficult to diagnose because the examination is often normal during clinical assessment. In adults, functional tympanometry testing, performed by asking the patient to Valsalva and Toynbee while measuring the pressure shift, can aid in the diagnosis of ETD. However, standardized values do not exist in children. We aim to determine the age at which children can perform these maneuvers and the normative values in this population. METHODS: Patients with a normal basic ear examination 4 years and older, presenting to the pediatric Otolaryngology clinic, were recruited. Otoscopy, baseline tympanometry, followed by Valsalva and Toynbee maneuvers were performed. Because there are no pediatric norms, we hypothesized that children would achieve the same minimum normal pressure shift as cited in the adult literature (+20 daPa or higher for Valsalva and -20 daPa or lower for Toynbee). The data were analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves and logistic regression. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-eight children (276 ears) were assessed. Participants as young as 4 years old were able to perform a Valsalva and Toynbee. Age cut-offs at which children achieved adult norms were 12.5 years ( p = 0.016) and 8.5 years ( p = 0.071) for Valsalva and Toynbee maneuvers, respectively. Mean pressure shift ranged from +29 to -36 daPa, and males were 2.5 times more likely to achieve Toynbee compared with females ( p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Functional tympanometry testing may be used to help diagnose barochallenge-induced ETD in older children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".