Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Ideas and Opinions17 November 2020Connecting With Older Adults via TelemedicineCarrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhDCarrie L. Nieman, MD, MPHJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland (C.L.N., E.S.O.) and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhDJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland (C.L.N., E.S.O.)Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/M20-1322 Annals Author Insight Video - Carrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH, and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhD In this video, Carrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH, and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhD, offer additional insight into the article, "Connecting With Older Adults via Telemedicine." (Duration 3:21) SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Routine outpatient visits have rapidly transitioned to telemedicine because of the evolving coronavirus pandemic. In the rush toward telemedicine, our older adults may be at particular risk for missing out or misunderstanding their providers. Hearing loss is almost universal among older adults: Approximately two thirds of persons aged 70 years or older have clinically significant hearing loss (1). Age-related hearing loss occurs gradually and frequently leaves older patients with the sense that their hearing is adequate but that clarity is the issue and others mumble. Clinic-based visits, which are generally face to face in a quiet environment, allow hearing loss ...References1. Lin FR, Thorpe R, Gordon-Salant S, et al. Hearing loss prevalence and risk factors among older adults in the United States. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2011;66:582-90. [PMID: 21357188] doi:10.1093/gerona/glr002 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Yueh B, Shapiro N, MacLean CH, et al. Screening and management of adult hearing loss in primary care: scientific review. JAMA. 2003;289:1976-85. [PMID: 12697801] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Stronge AJ, Rogers WA, Fisk AD. Human factors considerations in implementing telemedicine systems to accommodate older adults. J Telemed Telecare. 2007;13:1-3. [PMID: 17288650] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Goman AM, Lin FR. Prevalence of hearing loss by severity in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2016;106:1820-2. [PMID: 27552261] doi:10.2105/AJPH.2016.303299 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Martin-Khan M, Wootton R, Gray L. A systematic review of the reliability of screening for cognitive impairment in older adults by use of standardised assessment tools administered via the telephone. J Telemed Telecare. 2010;16:422-8. [PMID: 21030488] doi:10.1258/jtt.2010.100209 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Pendlebury ST, Welch SJ, Cuthbertson FC, et al. Telephone assessment of cognition after transient ischemic attack and stroke: modified telephone interview of cognitive status and telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment versus face-to-face Montreal Cognitive Assessment and neuropsychological battery. Stroke. 2013;44:227-9. [PMID: 23138443] doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.673384 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Swenor BK, Ramulu PY, Willis JR, et al. The prevalence of concurrent hearing and vision impairment in the United States [Letter]. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:312-3. [PMID: 23338042] doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.1880 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Anderson M, Perrin A. Tech adoption climbs among older adults. 17 May 2017. Accessed at www.pewresearch.org/internet/2017/05/17/tech-adoption-climbs-among-older-adults on 25 March 2020. Google Scholar9. Nieman CL, Marrone N, Szanton SL, et al. Racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in hearing health care among older Americans. J Aging Health. 2016;28:68-94. [PMID: 25953816] doi:10.1177/0898264315585505 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10. Mamo SK, Nieman CL, Lin FR. Prevalence of untreated hearing loss by income among older adults in the United States. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2016;27:1812-1818. [PMID: 27818440] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland (C.L.N., E.S.O.)Grant Support: In part by funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIA K23AG059900 [Dr. Nieman] and NIA R01AG057725 [Dr. Oh]) and the Roberts Family Fund (Dr. Oh).Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M20-1322.Corresponding Author: Carrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH, Cochlear Center for Hearing & Public Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2024 East Monument Street, Suite 2-700, Baltimore, MD 21205; e-mail, [email protected]edu.Current Author Addresses: Dr. Nieman: Cochlear Center for Hearing & Public Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 2024 East Monument Street, Suite 2-700, Baltimore, MD 21205.Dr. Oh: Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 5501 Hopkins Bayview Circle, Room 1B.76, Baltimore, MD 21224.Author Contributions: Conception and design: C.L. Nieman, E.S. Oh.Drafting of the article: C.L. Nieman, E.S. Oh.Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: C.L. Nieman, E.S. Oh.Final approval of the article: C.L. Nieman, E.S. Oh.Administrative, technical, or logistic support: C.L. Nieman.This article was published at Annals.org on 11 August 2020. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement Annals Author Insight Video - Carrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH, and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhD In this video, Carrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH, and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhD, offer additional insight into the article, "Connecting With Older Adults via Telemedicine." (Duration 3:21) FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byUnderstanding the intention to use metaverse in healthcare utilizing a mix method approachDelivering Virtual Care to Patients with Cognitive Impairment within the Veterans Health Administration: Multi-level Barriers and SolutionsVirtual frailty assessment for older adults with hematologic malignanciesTelehealth Competencies in Medical Education: New Frontiers in Faculty Development and Learner AssessmentsThe current role of telehealth in the management of patients with osteoporosisSmartphone Apps for Patients With Hematologic Malignancies: Systematic Review and Evaluation of ContentCoronavirus Disease 2019Telephone Communication and Delivering Difficult NewsComprehensive management of acute pulmonary embolism in primary care using telemedicine in the COVID-eraBarriers and Facilitators to Telemedicine: Can You Hear Me Now?Telematic cardiology consultation in the elderly. The 5 M framework can help. ResponseConsulta telemática de cardiología para ancianos. La regla de las 5 M puede ser una ayuda. RespuestaHearing LossCarrie L. Nieman, MD, MPH and Esther S. Oh, MD, PhD 17 November 2020Volume 173, Issue 10Page: 831-832KeywordsCognitive impairmentComputersDisclosureElderlyGeriatricsHearingInternetPrevention, policy, and public healthTelemedicineVision ePublished: 11 August 2020 Issue Published: 17 November 2020 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2020 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,174 | 0,057 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».