MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410293340 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/8e3kg_v1

Neural correlates of cross-modal plasticity in partial hearing loss: A mini-review

2025· preprint· en· W4410293340 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia V. Aguiar, Jennifer Preman, Brandon T. Paul

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVestibular and auditory disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeural correlates of consciousnessModalHearing lossAudiologyNeuroplasticityPsychologyPlasticityNeuroscienceMedicinePhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-modal plasticity is an adaptive process where sensory neurons that have lost input from one sensory modality begin to respond to another modality, such as in deafness when auditory neurons begin to respond to visual stimulation. Research in cross-modal plasticity in the auditory system has mainly focused on extreme forms of sensory loss like total deafness, especially when occurring at birth or early in life. However, hearing loss is more common in adulthood and only partly affects hearing function to mild or moderate degrees. Fewer research studies have focused on cross-modal plasticity under these conditions. Our objective was to review evidence for cross-modal plasticity to evaluate if findings derived from populations with deafness extend to populations with partial hearing loss. We conclude that cross-modal plasticity occurs in adult-onset partial hearing loss and is likely to recruit cognitive systems. However, cross-modal effects are not clearly separate from intra-modal contributions. It is also unclear if cross-modal plasticity in partial hearing loss confers a behavioural advantage, or if it is influenced by age and cognitive decline.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVestibular and auditory disorders→French-language works237,207→