MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2642262521 · doi:10.1080/14992027.2017.1337937

Prevalence and associated factors of hearing aid use among older adults in Chile

2017· article· en· W2642262521 on OpenAlex

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

VenueInternational Journal of Audiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
FundersComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica
KeywordsAudiologyHearing aidHearing lossMedicinePsychologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of use of hearing aids by older adults in Chile and the influence of some variables such as education level, income level and geographic area of residence on the prevalence of hearing aids. DESIGN: A national cross-sectional survey which was carried out in 2009. STUDY SAMPLE: A representative sample of 4766 Chilean older adults aged 60 years and above. RESULTS: The percentage of older adults in Chile who self-reported hearing problems and used hearing aids was 8.9%. Such prevalence increased for adults living in urban areas and for those who knew about the new Chilean programme of universal access to health services (AUGE). For older adults who did not know about this programme, significant associations between the use of hearing aids and the variables of age, geographic area of residence, and income level were found. CONCLUSIONS: People's knowledge about AUGE programme may positively influence the use of hearing aids, although a direct effect cannot be attributed.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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