Audiologic care for clients with multiple medical comorbidities: Modifications to clinical practice and inclusion of family members and caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Older adult clients seeking audiologic rehabilitation commonly present with concomitant health issues, such as visual impairment, decline in manual dexterity, and changes in cognitive status. Audiologists may modify assessment and treatment plans to accommodate these health issues, and may include family members and caregivers in their rehab planning as part of a family-centered approach to client care. Charts from 159 clients of a geriatric audiology clinic who presented for a hearing aid evaluation in 2015 were examined to determine a) how frequently audiologists indicated that their clients experienced medical comorbidities related to vision, manual dexterity, and cognition; b) specific modifications to clinical practice made by the audiologists to accommodate for these comorbidities; and c) level of involvement of family members/caregivers in the client’s audiologic rehabilitation, as noted in the chart by the audiologist. The institutional medical health records were also examined to extract any additional information about the clients' health status. The audiologists noted prevalence rates for visual, manual dexterity, and cognitive issues of approximately 50%, 35%, and 45%, respectively. Modifications to clinical practice, such as using rechargeable hearing aids for clients with poor manual dexterity, were made to accommodate these comorbidities. Although the clients were frequently accompanied by a family member or caregiver, in fewer than 20% of the cases did the audiologist explicitly note this information in the chart. Accumulating evidence suggests that the negative consequences of hearing loss, such as social isolation and reduced overall well-being, are not limited to the impaired individual. Rather, hearing loss, especially in older adults, can also have devastating effects on family members and caregivers. We will discuss potential changes to audiologic best practice that could serve to a) accommodate medical comorbidities in older clients, and b) encourage inclusion of significant others to optimize treatment success.
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 | 0.011 |
| 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".