Parents' Preferences for Services for Children with Hearing Loss: A Conjoint Analysis Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In Brief Objective: Early identification of permanent childhood hearing loss through universal newborn hearing screening is rapidly becoming a standard of care. However, it is well recognized that hearing screening must be embedded within a comprehensive system of rehabilitation and parent support services. This study was undertaken with parents of young children with permanent hearing loss to examine their preferences for characteristics associated with intervention services. A secondary goal was to explore whether preferences may differ according to patient subgroups. Design: Conjoint analysis, a preference-based economic technique, was used to investigate parents' strength of preferences. A cross-sectional survey that consisted of hypothetical clinic scenarios was developed based on information from qualitative interviews with parents. The questionnaire was administered to parents receiving intervention services in the province of Ontario, Canada, shortly after the implementation of a universal hearing screening program. The sample was recruited from three different clinical programs. Results: A total of 48 of 75 respondents completed the questionnaire, a response rate of 64%. The participants varied by screening status of the child (25 screened, 23 not screened), type of device (23 hearing aids, 25 cochlear implants), and region. All five characteristics of care that were selected for inclusion in the survey were found to be statistically significant attributes of services: coordinated services, access to parent support, access to information, frequency of services, and location of services. Parents showed a preference for clinic-based rather than home-based services. Preferences toward once a week therapy services rather than services two to three times weekly were also found. In particular, parents valued service models that consisted of well-coordinated care with access to support from other parents. Differences in respondents according to hearing screening status (screened or unscreened), type of hearing device (hearing aid or cochlear implant), or region (Ottawa or Toronto) did not seem to affect parents' preferences for attributes of care. Conclusions: Conjoint analysis is a useful technique for quantifying parents' preferences for care. The values expressed by parents provide insights into the aspects of a service model that should receive consideration in the development of programs for young children with hearing loss and their families. Population-based infant hearing screening has received worldwide attention as an opportunity to improve outcomes for children with hearing loss. However, there is limited information available on how to maximize the potential opportunities provided by early detection of hearing loss. Using conjoint analysis, a stated preference technique from the field of marketing, this study explored parent preferences for service delivery after the identification of hearing loss. The results of the questionnaire demonstrated that, above all other characteristics of service models, parents valued coordinated services that were available through one agency or at least managed through one agency. Overall, the survey indicated that the preferred model was coordinated, clinic-based services with a range of audiology, speech and psychosocial services, access to parent support, and information available through the health service program.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».