MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W247460380

Health Promotion and Injury Prevention Education for Student Singers

2012· article· en· W247460380 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aaron Ziegler, Michael M. Johns

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Singing · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSingingHealth promotionMedical educationPromotion (chess)PsychologyMedicinePublic relationsNursingPolitical scienceManagementPublic health
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION THE LATIN MAXIM SCIENTIA POTENTIA EST (knowledge is power) deserves renewed consideration from educators involved in the training of singers. The connection between professional singing and occupation-related voice problems has been well established,1 and evidence suggests voice problems in professional singers may commence as early as the singer's tenure as a student.2 In fact, as many as 56.5% of student singers report a current voice problem.3 That figure, however, may actually underestimate the true extent of voice problems in student singers, as demonstrated by clinically significant laryngoscopic findings among asymptomatic singing students.4 Whereas some student singers are unaware of laryngeal or vocal changes, other student singers are rather troubled by a vocal impairment, leading some to express serious mental health concerns as a result.5 Such students may forego singing-related opportunities, and some even abandon performing altogether.6 Clearly, one important aim in the training of student singers is to promote their vocal health and prevent injury to enhance academic and professional success. HEALTH PROMOTION IN SCHOOLS In response to the potential threat health problems pose to academic and later professional success in all domains, the World Health Organization (WHO) Division of Health Promotion, Education, and Communication launched an initiative called the Health Promotion in Schools.7 The WHO Global School Health Promotion Initiative emerged in response to the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion in 1986, the recommendations of the WHO Expert Committee on Comprehensive School Health Education and Promotion in 1995, and the Jakarta Declaration of the Fourth International Conference on Health Promotion in 1997.8 Specifically, the WHO Expert Committee reviewed research from developed and developing countries and found a preponderance of evidence indicating that the creation of school-based programs promoting health and reducing health risks in schools leads to improved educational outcomes. An effort has been made to increase the number of health promoting schools, that is, schools that strive to prevent health problems among students by changing the conditions that affect risk. One mechanism by which health promotion and injury prevention can be accomplished is with the establishment of curricula. Coursework should not only focus on developing students' understanding of factors that affect health, but should also instill skills to help students navigate situations that potentially threaten health. Paramount to achieving this goal is a joint effort among health professionals, school personnel, parents, students, and the community at large. In 2004, professionals in performing arts medicine and music set out to address the challenge set forth by the WHO. These individuals collaborated to develop a set of initial recommendations addressing health promotion and injury prevention specifically in schools of music at the university level.9 Four recommendations were established by the Health Promotion in Schools of Music Project (HPSM): (1) schools of music should adopt a framework to become a health promoting school; (2) music students should enroll in an undergraduate occupational health course that addresses injury prevention; (3) music students should receive education during ensemble-based instructions about music-related hearing loss; and (4) music students should receive assistance in seeking out health care resources. The remaining focus of this article is the HPSM's second recommendation-the development of an occupational health course-with specific suggestions for research-based content built around two complementary conceptual frameworks. In addition, data from the limited number of previously published studies as well as a recently completed study will be presented, providing preliminary evidence about potential benefits of occupational health courses for student singers. …

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,029
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,098

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0290,003

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 Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,437
Écart entre enseignants0,395 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
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

Citations5
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of SingingMême sujetInjury Epidemiology and PreventionTravaux en français237 207