1,720,957 research outputs found
USAIS Outcomes of Cochlear Implantation in Mondini Dysplasia
No full textA anonymised dataset of cochlear implant outcomes for individuals with Mondini Dysplasia at University of Southampton Auditory Implant Service.
This dataset is available 'on request' to bone fide researchers with ethical clearance. Please complete the attached request form and return it to [email protected]</span
Should we measure and modulate inflammation before cochlear implantation to improve long-term hearing outcomes?
No full textBackground: deaf children undergoing cochlear implantation have the potential to meet developmental milestones in line with their biological hearing peers. Unfortunately, hearing and language outcomes following implantation are variable. The biological factors contributing to underperformance are poorly understood. This study aims to determine whether the inflammatory/immune state of the ear is one factor contributing to underperformance. Insertion of an electrode array elicits a variable inflammatory response which can result in scar tissue (fibrosis) around the array1. An aberrant response can result in increased inflammation and fibrosis and contribute to poorer hearing2. Macrophages, tissue-resident immune cells, acquire ‘memory’ to previous insults (infections) which can result in an increased inflammatory response to subsequent insults3. Within the ear, an increased inflammatory response will cause tissue damage and contribute to hearing loss4; after implantation, this may contribute to greater fibrosis and poorer hearing outcomes. Early identification of inflammatory risk could mitigate this. Methods: CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation) is a cross-sectional study of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation. Tissue and fluid samples will be collected from the ear/(s) being implanted during surgery including middle ear mucosa, a middle ear swab and cochlear fluid. A nasal swab and blood sample will be collected at the time of surgery. Following implantation, routine clinical outcome measures and health data will be collected for up to five years. We hypothesise that the tissue response to inflammation varies due to the individual inflammatory differences in the ear at the time of implantation. We will use CosMx5, a spatial transcriptomics technique that measures spatial gene expression, to measure the inflammatory state of the middle ear mucosal samples. We will characterise the expression profile of the major cell types identified in the middle ear mucosa samples. Results: to gather pilot data, we will generate a spatial gene expression profile of the key immune regulators in the middle ear (macrophages) and the surrounding cells. We will use bioinformatic analysis to determine if there are differences in gene expression of the cells within and between samples and determine whether these cells are communicating with each other. This pilot data will allow us to determine whether this technique yields valuable gene expression data for the major middle ear cell types and whether this technique should be used to analyse all mucosal samples collected in CHIEF. Conclusion: this will be the first spatial gene analysis of cells in the middle ear of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation. This work will provide new knowledge of the immune biology of the ear in children undergoing implantation and inform our understanding of biological factors that can influence hearing outcomes with an implant. Through CHIEF, we will generate a database containing clinical and medical history of children undergoing cochlear implantation and a tissue bank. We will analyse the relationship between the biological data and clinical data (collected over five years) to interrogate how the immune state of the ear is associated with long-term hearing outcomes with an implant. If a predictable relationship is determined, there is potential to improve long-term hearing outcomes in children following implantation by modulating inflammation, using anti-inflammatory therapies. Reference 1.Seyyedi, M. & Nadol, J. B. Intracochlear inflammatory response to cochlear implant electrodes in humans. Otology and Neurotology 35, 1545–1551 (2014).2.Hough, K. et al. Inflammation at the tissue-electrode interface in a case of rapid deterioration in hearing performance leading to explant after cochlear implantation. Otology & Neurotology 42, e445–e450 (2021).3.Cunningham, C., Wilcockson, D. C., Campion, S., Lunnon, K. & Perry, V. H. Central and systemic endotoxin challenges exacerbate the local inflammatory response and increase neuronal death during chronic neurodegeneration. Journal of Neuroscience 25, 9275–9284 (2005).4.Xia, A. et al. Chronic suppurative otitis media causes macrophage-associated sensorineural hearing loss. J Neuroinflammation 19, 224 (2022).5.He, S. et al. High-plex imaging of RNA and proteins at subcellular resolution in fixed tissue by spatial molecular imaging. Nat Biotechnol 40, 1794–1806 (2022). <br/
Is there an inflammatory signature of the middle ear that identifies children at risk of poor hearing with a cochlear implant?
No full textBackground: middle ear infection/inflammation (otitis media) is a leading cause of hearing loss worldwide. Otitis media in childhood increases the risk of hearing loss in adulthood and can affect outcomes following cochlear implantation. Cochlear implants can be life-changing for deaf children. Unfortunately, some children don’t achieve the expected hearing with their implant. Poorer hearing can be caused by aberrant tissue growth, or fibrosis, around the implant. The mechanism is poorly understood.Preclinical and temporal bone studies have shown that otitis media causes macrophage-associated inflammation and damage within the cochlea. There is little understanding of how inflammatory signalling from the middle ear activates cochlear macrophages and how this could affect hearing with a cochlear implant. Aim: to determine whether the inflammatory state of the middle ear, at implantation, is a biological factor contributing to poor performance in children with implants.Methods: CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation) is a cross-sectional study of children undergoing cochlear implantation. Samples of the middle ear mucosa and cochlear fluid have been collected during surgery. A study database of clinical and hearing data spanning five years post-implantation is being built. Results: working with BioR, we carried out secondary analysis of single-cell RNA-sequencing data from a preclinical otitis media model. We identified strong interactions between pro-inflammatory macrophages and fibroblasts in rodent middle ear mucosa. The single-cell transcriptome of the human inflamed middle ear remains largely unexplored. Using spatial transcriptomics (CosMx), we aim to characterise the spatial gene profile and intercellular interactions of macrophages and fibroblasts in the middle ear mucosa collected through CHIEF.Conclusion: the relationship between the biological and clinical data will be analysed to interrogate how the inflammatory signature of the ear is associated with long-term hearing outcomes. If a predictable relationship is determined, anti-inflammatories could be used to modulate inflammation and improve hearing following implantation. <br/
STROBE Checklist for 'Protocol for CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation) study; an observational, cross-sectional, study of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation'
No full textThis dataset is a STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) checklist for the publication titled 'Protocol for CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation) study; an observational, cross-sectional, study of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation'. The checklist has been completed to indicate where the appropriate information is in the manuscript.
</span
Understanding the role of middle ear macrophages in profoundly deaf children; the potential to improve hearing with cochlear implants
No full textBackground: middle ear infection and inflammation (otitis media) is the leading cause of hearing loss worldwide. A history of childhood otitis media increases the risk of hearing loss in adulthood [1] and can affect outcomes following cochlear implantation [2]. Cochlear implants are a life changing intervention for profoundly deaf children. Unfortunately, many children don’t achieve the expected benefits of their implant [3]. A variable tissue, or fibrotic, response to implantation may be factor [4] however this is not well understood. Pre-clinical and temporal bone [5] studies have shown that middle ear infection causes inflammation and damage within the cochlea associated with changes in macrophages [6]. However, there is little understanding of the role of macrophages in how well children hear with a cochlear implant. We hypothesise that the activation state of middle ear macrophages differs between children undergoing cochlear implantation due to their varying immune history [7,8]. This study aims to determine whether immune biology of the middle ear is a biological factor contributing to underperformance in children with cochlear implants. Methods: CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation)[9] is a cross-sectional study of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation. Samples of the middle ear mucosa and cochlear fluid will be collected during surgery. Following implantation, routine clinical outcome measures and health data will be collected for up to five years. We will use CosMx [10], a spatial transcriptomics platform, to characterise the spatial gene expression of the macrophages in the middle ear of children undergoing cochlear implantation, for the first time. We will use bioinformatic analysis to determine if there are differences in gene expression of the macrophages within and between samples and determine what cells the macrophages are communicating with.Conclusion: this work will provide new knowledge of the immune biology of the ear in children undergoing implantation and inform our understanding of biological factors that can influence hearing outcomes with an implant. Through CHIEF, we will generate a database containing clinical and medical history of children undergoing cochlear implantation and a tissue bank. We will analyse the relationship between the biological and clinical data (collected over five years) to interrogate how the immune state of the ear is associated with long-term hearing outcomes. If a predictable relationship is determined, there is potential to improve long-term hearing outcomes in children following implantation by modulating inflammation, using anti-inflammatory therapies. References1 Aarhus L, Homøe P, Engdahl B. Otitis media in childhood and disease in adulthood: A 40-year follow-up study. Ear Hear. 2020;41:67–71. doi: 10.1097/AUD.00000000000007292 Alzoubi F, Odat H, Nuseir A, et al. Effect of otitis media with effusion on cochlear implant surgery: Technical difficulties, post-operative complications and outcome. Journal of Laryngology and Otology. 2015;129:762–6. doi: 10.1017/S00222151150016813 Cupples L, Ching TYC, Button L, et al. Language and speech outcomes of children with hearing loss and additional disabilities: identifying the variables that influence performance at five years of age. Int J Audiol. 2018;57:S93–104. doi: 10.1080/14992027.2016.12281274 Seyyedi M, Nadol JB. Intracochlear inflammatory response to cochlear implant electrodes in humans. Otology and Neurotology. 2014;35:1545–51. doi: 10.1097/MAO.00000000000005405 Monsanto R da C, Schachern P, Paparella MM, et al. Progression of changes in the sensorial elements of the cochlear and peripheral vestibular systems: The otitis media continuum. Hear Res. 2017;351:2–10. doi: 10.1016/j.heares.2017.05.0036 Xia A, Thai A, Cao Z, et al. Chronic suppurative otitis media causes macrophage-associated sensorineural hearing loss. J Neuroinflammation. 2022;19:224. doi: 10.1186/s12974-022-02585-w7 Hough K, Verschuur CA, Cunningham C, et al. Macrophages in the cochlea; an immunological link between risk factors and progressive hearing loss. Glia. 2021;1–20. doi: 10.1002/glia.240958 Cunningham C, Wilcockson DC, Campion S, et al. Central and systemic endotoxin challenges exacerbate the local inflammatory response and increase neuronal death during chronic neurodegeneration. Journal of Neuroscience. 2005;25:9275–84. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2614-05.20059 Hough K, Nichani J, Findlay C, et al. Protocol for CHIEF (cochlear implants and inner ear inflammation) study; an observational, cross-sectional, study of children and young people undergoing cochlear implantation [Preprint]. MedXRiv. Published Online First: 26 November 2024. doi: 10.1101/2024.11.25.2431776710 He S, Bhatt R, Brown C, et al. High-plex imaging of RNA and proteins at subcellular resolution in fixed tissue by spatial molecular imaging. Nat Biotechnol. 2022;40:1794–806. doi: 10.1038/s41587-022-01483-z <br/
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
