MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1524305436 · doi:10.17955/107.1.563

Outcomes of an Auditory-Verbal Program for Children With Hearing Loss: A Comparative Study With a Matched Group of Children With Normal Hearing

2007· article· en· W1524305436 on OpenAlexafffund
Dimity Dornan, Louise Hickson, Bruce E. Murdoch, Todd Houston

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Volta Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologyAudiologyHearing lossNonverbal communicationDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The speech and language developmental progress of children with hearing loss educated using an Auditory-Verbal approach was compared to that of a control group of children with normal hearing. The experimental group consisted of 29 children ages 2-6 years with a mean pure tone average in the better ear of 76.17 dB HL at 0.5, 1 and 2 kHz. The 29 children in the control group were matched for language age, receptive vocabulary, gender and parental education level with the children in the experimental group. A battery of standardized speech and language tests was administered to all children at the start of the study and again nine months later. Results indicated no significant differences in developmental progress between the experimental and control groups. This study is the first phase of a longitudinal study that will examine outcomes for children in an Auditory-Verbal program over four years.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Volta ReviewSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207