Inadequate vocal hygiene habits associated with the presence of self-reported voice symptoms in telemarketers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The aim of this study is to determine possible associations between vocal hygiene habits and self-reported vocal symptoms in telemarketers.Patients and methods: A cross-sectional study that included 79 operators from call centres in Chile was carried out. Their vocal hygiene habits and self-reported symptoms were investigated using a validated and reliable questionnaire created for the purposes of this study.Results: Forty-five percent of telemarketers reported having one or more vocal symptoms. Among them, 16.46% reported that their voices tense up when talking and 10.13% needed to clear their throat to make their voices clearer. Five percent mentioned that they always talk without taking a break and 40.51% reported using their voices in noisy environments. The number of working hours per day and inadequate vocal hygiene habits were associated with the presence of self-reported symptoms. Additionally, an interaction between the use of the voice in noisy environments and not taking breaks during the day was observed. Finally, the frequency of inadequate vocal hygiene habits was associated with the number of symptoms reported.Conclusions: Using the voice in noisy environments and talking without taking breaks were both associated with the presence of specific vocal symptoms. This study provides some evidence about the interaction between these two inadequate vocal hygiene habits that potentiates vocal symptoms.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".