Older Adults With a Combination of Vision and Hearing Impairment Experience Higher Rates of Cognitive Impairment, Functional Dependence, and Worse Outcomes Across a Set of Quality Indicators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Hearing and vision impairment were examined across several health-related outcomes and across a set of quality indicators (QIs) in home care clients with both vision and hearing loss (or dual sensory impairment [DSI]). METHOD: Data collected using the Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC) were analyzed in a sample of older home care clients. The QIs represent the proportion of clients experiencing negative outcomes (e.g., falls, social isolation). RESULTS: The average age of clients was 82.8 years ( SD = 7.9), 20.5% had DSI and 8.5% had a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Clients with DSI were more likely to have a diagnosis of dementia (not AD), have functional impairments, report loneliness, and have higher rates across 20 of the 22 QIs, including communication difficulty and cognitive decline. Clients with highly impaired hearing, and any visual impairment, had the highest QI rates. DISCUSSION: Individuals with DSI experience higher rates of adverse events across many health-related outcomes and QIs. Understanding the unique contribution of hearing and vision in this group can promote optimal quality of care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".