Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in clinical applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is uncertain whether clinically useful information of otolith function can be well characterized by vestibular-evoked-myogenic-potentials (VEMPs), i.e., electromyogenic activity recorded from sternomastoid muscles in response to brief loud auditory clicks. We aimed to assess the utility of VEMP testing in the differential diagnosis of dizziness (81 dizzy patients, 12 normals). We found that: (1) VEMP was reliably elicited from all controls and from 96% of patients without loss of vestibular function; (2) in patients with documented unilateral peripheral vestibular disorders, VEMP could reveal loss of otolith function that usefully facilitated diagnoses; and (3) such otolith function loss was independent of canal function loss revealed by caloric testing. We conclude that the VEMP-test is clinically useful to assess vestibular (otolith and/or inferior vestibular nerve) function, providing information complementary to that obtained from caloric testing (horizontal semicircular canal and/or superior vestibular nerve function).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".