MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087573025 · doi:10.3766/jaaa.15.3.6

Hearing Specific and Generic Measures of the Psychosocial Impact of Hearing Aids

2004· article· en· W2087573025 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle H. Saunders, Jeffrey W. Jutai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Academy of Audiology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHearing aidPsychosocialAudiologyHearing lossMedicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hearing-specific and generic measures of hearing aid outcome were examined in order (a) to determine their relative sensitivity to hearing aid use and (b) to examine the relationship between pre–hearing aid use expectations and post-use outcomes. Ninety-two hearing-impaired individuals completed some combination of the Abbreviated Profile of Hearing Aid Benefit, Expected Consequences of Hearing Aid Ownership (ECHO), Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life (SADL), and Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale, and provided reports of their daily and lifetime hearing aid use. In general, (a) the longer individuals wear hearing aids, the more positive the reported outcome, and (b) ECHO scores of non–hearing aid users are higher than SADL scores of new hearing aid users (six weeks to one year of use) but are similar to those obtained from experienced users (greater than one year of use). Between-questionnaire comparisons showed the generic measure to be as sensitive as the hearing aid specific measures. We suggest that generic measures have some advantages over hearing specific measures but that each has a place in the clinic. Se examinaron medidas genéricas y específicas de la audición en el rendimiento de auxiliares auditivos, para (a) determinar la sensibilidad relativa al uso del auxiliar auditivo, y (b) examinar la relación entre expectativas previas al uso del auxiliar auditivo y resultados posteriores a su utilización. Noventa y dos individuos hipoacúsicos completaron una combinación del Perfil Abreviado de Beneficio del Auxiliar Auditivo, Consecuencias Esperadas de la Posesión de un Auxiliar Auditivo (ECHO), Satisfacción y Amplificación en la Vida Diaria (SADL), y la Escala del Impacto Psico-social de Dispositivos de Ayuda, aportando reportes del uso de su auxiliar auditivo diariamente y a lo largo de toda su vida. En general, (a) cuanto más tiempo han usado el auxiliar auditivo los individuos, tanto más positivo es el resultado reportado, y (b) los puntajes ECHO de seis no usuarios de audífono fueron mayores que los puntajes SADL de los nuevos usuarios (seis semanas a un año de uso). Las comparaciones entre cuestionarios mostró que las medidas genéricas eran tan sensibles como las medidas específicas del auxiliar auditivo. Sugerimos que las medidas genéricas tienen ciertas ventajas sobre las medidas específicas de audición, pero cada una tiene su lugar en la clínica.

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)0.001
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 score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations59
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Academy of AudiologySame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207