MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2330238647 · doi:10.1097/01.hj.0000365477.55363.67

O me of little faith

2009· article· en· W2330238647 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
David H. Kirkwood

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Hearing Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRecessionPessimismFaithQuarter (Canadian coin)BusinessAdvertisingEconomicsHistoryKeynesian economics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Writing in this space a year ago, I was expressing pretty pessimistic thoughts about the hearing industry. With the banking system on the verge of collapse, stock and home prices plummeting, and the economy in recession, I expected hearing aid sales to go down too. I tried to sugar coat the situation, entitling my editorial “Thinking positively about '09,” but I foresaw a possible double-digit drop in sales. Yes, I had heard from some industry old-timers that the hearing industry is recession-proof. But clearly this recession was worse than any other since 1990 when I started writing about hearing care, and I felt sure its effects on our industry would be bad. Well, as it turns, out I was wrong, and I'm glad of it. Granted, in the second half of 2008, sales did go down. But the industry quickly righted itself and, as you will read in this month's Cover Story, sales through the first three quarters of 2009 grew by over 6%. Outside the VA the increase was only a little over 2%, but in the third quarter even that sector rose by 4.3%. These numbers aren't great, but take a look at almost any other industry, and by comparison hearing care is booming. Why is this industry so different? Well, the theory put forth by the experts I consulted for my story is that, despite the conventional wisdom, hearing aids are in most cases not discretionary purchases. Typically, people with hearing loss put off getting hearing aids for as long as they can stand it. When their hearing get so bad they finally take the leap, they are so desperate to hear that not even a bleak economy will stand in their way. A COMFORT—AND A FRUSTRATION If indeed hearing aids are usually purchased out of necessity, not choice, that is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it's reassuring for those who dispense or manufacture hearing aids that demand for their products and services can withstand economic adversity. On the other hand, it is frustrating to realize that when the economy turns around and people go out and buy new cars and houses, most of those who haven't been able to enjoy dinner out or church services for 5 years will still be saying, “My hearing isn't that bad. I don't need a hearing aid yet.” Wouldn't it be great if consumers started to seek hearing help because they believed it would make their lives more enjoyable, not because are afraid if they don't their wife will leave them or they may miss the cry of a grandchild in distress. Clearly we want both types of consumers to take action—those whose hearing has become so bad that amplification is a necessity and those whose hearing isn't that bad, but who have decided the time to hear better is while it is still a matter of choice. ATTITUDES ARE CHANGING To avoid underestimating the prospects for hearing aids again this year, let me point out some evidence that we are moving, slowly but surely, toward the point when acquiring hearing aids is often a thoughtful, informed decision to take control of one's hearing, not an act of last resort. One reason this seems likely to happen more and more is that today's hearing aids work so much better than those of the pre-digital era. That is improving how consumers view these devices. Another positive development is the changing look and image of hearing aids. As all of you know, today's devices often come in bright colors, lively patterns, and pleasing shapes not dreamt of a decade ago. And the industry's marketing often presents hearing aids as attractive devices that vital, youthful people who need help with their hearing shouldn't be embarrassed to be seen with. The rest of the world is beginning to pay attention. For example, as noted in HJ Report, mainstream institutions that a decade ago would not have had hearing aids on their radar screens, are honoring them for outstanding engineering and design. Change is seen in the latest MarkeTrak finding that the hearing aid penetration of the hearing-impaired population in the U.S. crept up to almost 25% in 2008, the highest ever measured and significantly above the 20% rate recorded in 1997. To be sure, progress is much slower than we would like. But little by little, I believe that hearing aids are becoming products that people get because they choose to, not because they feel they have no choice.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,726
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,150

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,051
Tête enseignante GPT0,304
Écart entre enseignants0,253 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Hearing JournalMême sujetHearing Loss and RehabilitationTravaux en français237 207