The impact of the video head impulse test on side determination in cochlear implantation surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of the Video Head Impulse Test (vHIT) on side determination in cochlear implantation (CI) surgery. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of vHIT results from 75 adult sequential CI recipients at a regional auditory implant centre between January 2023 and April 2024. Patients were grouped by side of implantation (right, n = 40; left, n = 35). vHIT results were assessed through clinical assessment and normative comparison. For categorical analysis, patients were classified as having their 'better' or 'worse' balance ear implanted, or normal or equally abnormal function bilaterally. Clinical assessment was based on clinician interpretation of vHIT graphs, while normative comparison applied established gain thresholds and corrective saccades to define abnormality. RESULTS: Neither clinical nor normative analysis demonstrated a significant association between vHIT findings and the side implanted. This is supported by continuous gain value analysis showing no statistical differences between cohorts. DISCUSSION: Although implanting the ear with poorer vestibular function may minimise postoperative disequilibrium, vestibular testing is not universally performed nor advocated for. Other factors, including patient preference and anatomical constraints, may have considerable influence on side selection. CONCLUSION: Concerns about implanting the 'better' balance ear are valid, however, vHIT does not outweigh other factors when determining CI sidedness.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".