Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cauliflower ear is one of the most common injuries that occur during training and competition wrestling.In the upper extremity injuries, more common among wrestlers have cauliflower ear and due to the possible effects on hearing ear fracture, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on hearing the wrestlers had cauliflower ears.Methods: Sixty professional wrestlers in Yazd province participated in this study.(The mean and standard deviation of age: 23.8 2.2 years, height: 174 5.8 cm, weighs: 69.3 5.7 kg).Wrestlers did not have any record of such surgery and ear diseases.The samples were divided into three groups, 20 subjects had one cauliflower ear, and 20 subjects had both cauliflower ears and 20 subjects with healthy ears as control group.Hearing of the subjects was measured using audiometry test.Results: Results showed that the hearing level in one cauliflower ear wrestlers were 26.88 4.22 dB, Wrestlers with cauliflower in both ears 28.83 3.09 dB, while in control with healthy ear hearing was 2.42 2.77 dB.The hearing in the cauliflower ears is significantly lower than healthy control group.Subjects with both cauliflower ears had more hearing lose than wrestlers with one cauliflower ear.It was more hearing loss in the higher frequencies, by increasing the frequency of hearing loss was increased.In statistic balance the subjects with CF ear/s had significant worse balance and in dynamic balance subjects with CF ear/s had less balance than peer groups (P < 0.001).Subjects with both CF ears had worse balance record especially in non-dominant leg (P < 0.001).Conclusion: The team's coaches and trainer should notice to these issues and also should revise the rules and using protection equipments for preventing this injury in wrestlers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.986 | 0.978 |
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".