MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1762738215 · doi:10.1080/14992020600944408

Providing an internet-based audiological counselling programme to new hearing aid users: A qualitative study

2006· article· en· W1762738215 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Audiology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversité de Montréal
FundersWorld Health Organization
KeywordsAudiologistHearing aidThe InternetAudiologyQualitative researchOtorhinolaryngologyHearing lossPsychologyMedical educationMedicineComputer scienceWorld Wide WebPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with an acquired hearing loss often have difficulty adjusting to a first hearing aid. Studies have shown that audiological counselling can facilitate adjustment to a first hearing aid. Because of its interactive nature, the internet could be a valuable tool to gain information about the experiences of the new hearing aid user and to address the needs for audiological counselling. An internet-based audiological counselling programme in the form of daily e-mails during the first month after the hearing aid fitting was offered to three new hearing aid users. The data, qualitative in nature, were comprised of the content of the e-mails and of in-depth interviews with the participants and their audiologist, and were analysed according to grounded theory. Overall, the internet-based audiological counselling programme provided rich descriptions of the experiences of the participants and reinforced positive adjustment behaviours experienced by them.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.288 · 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