Facilitating the transition from the pediatric to adult cochlear implant setting: perspectives of CI professionals
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Over the last 20 years, the availability of cochlear implantation has resulted in a pediatric population with different health needs than adults who receive cochlear implants (CIs). These pediatric patients are now transitioning to adult hospital settings in significant numbers. This issue of transition is not unique to cochlear implant services: research in other chronic health conditions has documented a variety of challenges for youth and health care providers. The objectives of this study were to identify factors important in the transition from pediatric to adult CI services from the perspective of service providers and to make recommendations to improve transition practices in the future. METHODS: Focus groups were conducted with professionals providing specialized CI services in pediatric and adult hospitals, and specialized educators in the school setting. Qualitative research methodology was used to identify key themes. Data extracted from patient files allowed comparison of pediatric and adult CI recipients. RESULTS: Youth who had received CIs in the pediatric setting differed from other adult patients in the incidence of prelingual hearing losses, and age at CI surgery. Key focus group themes were related to service delivery models, communication between settings, and skills needed by the patients to effectively meet their own health needs. DISCUSSION: Factors identified by CI professionals were very similar to those identified in research for other health conditions. From the focus groups, as well as other literature, a number of recommendations are proposed to facilitate a positive transition of young people to adult health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it