MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133338776 · doi:10.1044/2015_aja-14-0076

Cognitive Decline and Hearing Health Care for Older Adults

2015· article· en· W2133338776 on OpenAlex
M. Kathleen Pichora‐Fuller

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

VenueAmerican Journal of Audiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionCognitive declineHearing lossAudiologyIntervention (counseling)MedicineHealth careGerontologyAged carePsychologyPsychiatryDementiaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to consider the implications of age-related cognitive decline for hearing health care. METHOD: Recent research and current thinking about age-related declines in cognition and the links between auditory and cognitive aging are reviewed briefly. Implications of this research for improving prevention, assessment, and intervention in audiologic practice and for enhancing interprofessional teamwork are highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: Given the important connection between auditory and cognitive aging and given the high prevalence of both hearing and cognitive impairments in the oldest older adults, health care services could be improved by taking into account how both the ear and the brain change over the life span. By incorporating cognitive factors into audiologic prevention, assessment, and intervention, hearing health care can contribute to better hearing and communication as well as to healthy aging.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · 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