Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Over six percent of the world's population has disabling hearing loss.1 Across the globe, it can take years for those with hearing problems to seek care. Even when care is sought, the prescribed interventions are not often adopted.2 This issue has motivated the World Health Organization to coordinate World Hearing Day (WHD), an annual event that aims “to raise awareness on how to prevent deafness and hearing loss and promote ear and hearing care across the world.”3hearing health, World Hearing DayThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention argues that “plain language makes it easier for everyone to understand and use health information,”4 emphasizing its commitment to making high-quality information freely accessible to the public.5 As health articles on Wikipedia are collectively read more than 150 million times per month,6 one approach the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is taking to communicate research findings involves improving health content on Wikipedia.7 That includes the adoption by university programs of the WikiEducation Foundation https://wikiedu.org/8 platform to train students in Wikipedia editing. Through this mechanism, students contribute evidence-based content to Wikipedia as a class assignment.9 This year, NIOSH proposed and developed the online event Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019 http://bit.ly/2DzSdD410 to facilitate the improvement of Wikipedia content related to hearing, hearing health services, hearing testing, and preventive and rehabilitative interventions. The platform provided guidance and allowed anyone with access to a computer and the internet to participate in the campaign. Several institutions joined by either promoting the event or contributing content to Wikipedia, including the National Center for Environmental Health https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/, the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/index.html, the Hearing Center of Excellence https://hearing.health.mil/, the French National Research and Safety Institute for the Prevention of Occupational Accidents http://en.inrs.fr/, the International Society of Audiology https://www.isa-audiology.org/, the Acoustical Society of America https://acousticalsociety.org/, the American Academy of Audiology https://www.audiology.org/, and Hear in Cincinnati https://www.linkedin.com/company/hear-in-cincinnati. Participants from Cochrane, Cochrane Ear, Nose and Throat https://www.cochrane.org/, and university programs in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Brazil, and South Africa also contributed expert content, which led to content being added in English, Portuguese, French, Spanish, Italian, and Swedish. Through the Wikimedia outreach dashboard http://bit.ly/2KLLUmA,11 we were able to monitor the contributions and their reach with a great level of detail. Tracking data from the platform launch on Jan. 21, 2019, to March 31, 2019, showed that 74,000 words were contributed to 90 existing and seven new Wikipedia articles, and 21 images were donated to the open access repository WikiCommons. These pages received more than 2 million views (the 66 editors must be delighted to see this level of readership!). Crowdsourcing of expertise and knowledge is relevant for public health. The transparency of editorial processes and engagement on Wikipedia make it easier for experts to address any concerns they might have over participation. The heightened level of review of Wikipedia health articles is only possible due to the generous dedication of contributors who are health professionals and collaborative ventures, such as Wiki4WorldHearingDay2019, with scientific associations and agencies.12 We encourage organizations and institutions across the world to join current and future efforts.13 The breadth and accuracy of the Wikipedia coverage of the sciences vary widely. Awareness campaigns present unique opportunities to make hearing-related content one of the better developed domains within Wikipedia while providing quality information to the global audience in a place where they actually look for it. Thoughts on something you read here? Write to us at [email protected]
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 | 0,005 | 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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
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 ».