Applicability of Central Auditory Processing Disorder Models
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
PURPOSE: Central auditory processing disorder ([C]APD) is a relatively recent construct that has given rise to 2 theoretical models: the Buffalo Model and the Bellis/Ferre Model. These models describe 4 and 5 (C)APD categories, respectively. The present study examines the applicability of these models to clinical practice. Neither of these models was based on data from peer-reviewed sources. METHOD: This is a retrospective study that reviewed 178 records of children diagnosed with (C)APD, of which 48 were retained for analysis. RESULTS: More than 80% of the children could be classified into one of the Buffalo Model categories, while more than 90% remained unclassified under the Bellis/Ferre Model. This discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the classification of the Buffalo Model is based primarily on a single central auditory test (Staggered Spondaic Word), whereas the Bellis/Ferre Model classification uses a combination of auditory test results. CONCLUSION: The 2 models provide a conceptual framework for (C)APD, but they must be further refined to be fully applicable in clinical settings.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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