Bibliographic record
Abstract
Last fall, Nuts & Bolts held a contest asking readers to send us their “best ideas” on how to make day-to-day interactions between hearing professionals and patients more productive. We received many excellent, practical suggestions. I want to thank all of you who sent me your ideas.Figure: Robert L. MartinThis month, we present three of the best ideas. Other winners will be published in future columns. Christine Dino, MS, of Winnipeg, Manitoba, shared her approach to the difficult task of telling patients the truth about the limitations of amplification, while also showing them that they can hear well with hearing aids. Christine's admission that “sometimes hearing aids are downright awful” shows me she is communicating honestly and clearly. Here, in her own words, is Christine's idea: “REALITY HEARING AIDS” I tell my patients honestly that hearing aids will not solve all their problems; in some situations they will be great, in other situations they will be downright awful. But wearing them is better than not doing anything at all. This is what I call my “reality hearing aids” speech. I bring their unreasonable, super-high expectations down to earth. I also use this opportunity to introduce aural rehab, giving them a quick summary of what they can do to optimize day-to-day listening activities. I have also invested in high-quality speakers (subwoofers and tweeters) to use with my Noah 3 and Oticon Genie sound samples. They have been well received by my patients. I demonstrate soft to loud everyday sounds—the airplane sample makes it sound as if the plane is flying over my clinic! I also play some Tony Bennett songs and use my DVD player to demonstrate the closed-captioning features while patients watch Gladiator. My patients love their hearing aids—so much so that they do my advertising for me. Some patients don't even want to give me their HA when it needs repairs. Returns are few and far between. When patients realize their benefits, the hearing aids speak for themselves. Christine has also developed this useful schedule to help people get used to their new hearing aids. She warns them not to wear them too much at first because, she says, “too much too soon = disaster.” Week 1: Wear for 1 hour, break for an hour and repeat. Wear the hearing aids only at home while watching TV, listening to music, doing household chores, etc. Experiment with your hearing aids. Do not wear them more than 5 hours a day. If instead of an hour, you can only wear them 30–45 minutes, that's okay. Week 2: Wear for 2–3 hours, then break for an hour and repeat. Wear the hearing aids at home and in reasonably quiet social gatherings, e.g. at a get-together with family or friends. Walk outside on a quiet street and listen to the birds. Week 3: Wear for 4–5 hours, break for an hour, and repeat. Try in a variety of settings, e.g., restaurant, shopping center, meeting, casino, party. Note: If at anytime, you feel tired, upset, or nervous because you are hearing too much, take the hearing aid(s) off and put them in the case. The next excellent suggestion comes fromCandice L. Grotsky, MS, of PV Advantage Vision & Hearing in Phoenix. By asking patients to describe what they've been through, she strengthens her relationship with them and makes them feel they are contributing to their own rehabilitation. AN INFORMATIONAL BINDER To deal with the issue of trust and to get people to start thinking about their hearing, I have compiled a colorful and easy-to-read informational binder for my office. It contains timely news articles on hearing, hearing loss, and hearing aids. I use lighter articles from publications like The Hearing Journal as well as more research-oriented articles for the “engineer at heart” in all of us. The binder also has information on the risks of noise exposure, as well as a section on hearing aids and what to expect of them. Most importantly, I've included articles or testimonials from patients. Each article is unique, offering a particular patient's perspective on their experience with hearing aids, with our center, and with myself and our staff. I often see patients leafing through the binder. I think it helps build rapport even before I've met them. It is also a good exercise for patients to describe their hearing aid journey in words. Recounting what they have been through or are still going through lets them feel that they are contributing to the rehabilitation. It is especially important for “grumpy” or otherwise difficult patients we have helped to document their successes and achievements. Finally, Lynne Calavano, MA, of Center Four Speech Language Hearing Hearing Aids in Belmont, CA, describes a wonderful idea for getting the patient and significant other committed to working with the new hearing aids and you. A PATIENT COMMITMENT CARD Each week after I had fitted him binaurally, Barry came to my office and reported how well he was hearing. He told me he had not realized how much he was missing. He also reported that his family was pleased that he was hearing better. A success? Surprisingly, no! After a month or so, Barry stated that everything was perfect. He said he was very pleased with my office's services and that the end result could not have been better. However, he said that he searched himself and realized that he really did not want to hear better. I kept asking myself what had gone wrong. Finally, I decided I had not sufficiently explored this patient's commitment to hear better. Nor had I asked for a commitment from him. The light dawned. Perhaps I had failed to find out if he was really motivated. Perhaps I had just assumed that because he bought hearing aids he wanted to hear better. I decided that in the future I would explore a patient's motivation more thoroughly before dispensing hearing aids. Now, here comes my “best idea.” Why don't I give a “commitment card” to every patient? In fact, why not give one to the patient's spouse or significant other so they too will feel a responsibility? So, now, on the day of dispensing, I give each patient a card that states: I commit to better hearing. I want to hear my friends and family better. I want to hear the sounds of life better. I also give the spouse or significant other a commitment card, which says: I commit to better understanding. I understand that it is difficult to adjust to a hearing aid and that it does not restore normal hearing. I understand that communication takes two people. Patients really seem to like these cards. One very nice lady made up a number of them herself, added computer graphics, and brought them to the office. On the reverse side of the card, she had our business information. So, now on some of my business cards I have the commitment statement on the back. I hope this idea will help another dispenser be more productive and effective.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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 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".