Children With Mild Bilateral and Unilateral Hearing Loss: Parents’ Reflections on Experiences and Outcomes: Table 1.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with mild bilateral and unilateral hearing loss are now commonly identified early through newborn hearing screening initiatives. There remains considerable uncertainty about how to support parents and about which services to provide for children with mild bilateral and unilateral hearing loss. The goal of this study was to learn about parents' experiences and understand, from their perspectives, the impact of hearing loss in the mild range on the child's functioning. Parents of 20 children in Ontario, Canada, participated in the study. The median age of identification of hearing loss was 4.6 months (interquartile range: 3.6, 10.8). Parents appreciated learning early about hearing loss, but their experiences with the early process were mixed. Parents felt that professionals minimized the importance of milder hearing loss. There was substantial uncertainty about the need for hearing aids and the findings suggest that parents need specific guidance. Parents expressed concerns about the potential impact of hearing loss on their child's development, particularly at later ages.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".