MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782092936 · doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000535

Hearing Difficulty Is Associated With Injuries Requiring Medical Care

2018· article· en· W2782092936 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Mick, Danielle M. Foley, Frank R. Lin, M. Kathleen Pichora‐Fuller

Bibliographic record

VenueEar and Hearing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCochlearPfizer
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalIncidence (geometry)ConfoundingEmergency departmentHearing lossPopulationOccupational safety and healthHealth careMedical Expenditure Panel SurveyInjury preventionRelative riskRate ratioPoison controlDemographyEmergency medicineAudiologyEnvironmental healthHealth insurancePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Injuries are responsible for 11% of global disability-adjusted life years. Hearing difficulty may be a modifiable risk factor for injury. The primary aim was to determine whether subjective hearing difficulty is associated with increased incidence of injuries (all-type, workplace, and nonworkplace) serious enough to require health care among Americans aged 18 years and older. The secondary aim was to determine whether hearing difficulty is associated with increased use of health care for injuries. DESIGN: The analysis was performed using data from the 1999 to 2012 Medical Expenditure Panel Surveys-Household Component (MEPS-HC). Multivariable estimates are generalizable to the American noninstitutionalized adult population in 2006. Hearing difficulty was determined by computer-assisted personal interview. The primary outcome was number of separate injuries requiring health care (emergency department visits, hospital inpatient admissions, or medical office visits) during the follow-up period. Crude injury incidence rates were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Multivariable negative binomial regression was performed to determine the relative incidence rate of injuries among the group reporting hearing difficulties relative to the group reporting no difficulty in hearing, adjusting for relevant confounders. Variance estimates were adjusted to take into account the complex sample design. Results were stratified by sex. RESULTS: Of the 121,453 participants in MEPS-HC panels 6-16, 107,352 (88.4%) had complete data and were included in the analysis. The average follow-up was 1.27 years. Seven thousand six hundred and twenty-four participants (7.1%) reported hearing difficulty at baseline. During the follow-up period, 10,727 participants (10.0%) had one or more injuries. In multivariable analyses, hearing difficulty was significantly associated with increased incidence of all-type (males: incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.31, 95% CI 1.18-1.45, p value < 0.001; females: IRR 1.21, 95% CI 1.07-1.36, p value < 0.001), workplace (males: IRR 1.42, 95% CI 1.16-1.75, p value 0.001; females: IRR 1.61, 95% CI 1.12-2.31, p value 0.010), and nonworkplace injuries (males: IRR 1.24, 95% CI 1.09-1.42, p value 0.001; females: IRR 1.17, 95% CI, 1.02-1.34, p value 0.023). In multivariable analyses, hearing difficulty was associated with increased incidence of emergency department use in males (IRR 1.36, 95% CI 1.13-1.62, p value 0.001) and medical office visits in females (IRR 1.52, 95% CI 1.12-2.05, p value 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The study results suggest the need to investigate the mechanisms underlying the measured associations so that efforts may be directed toward reducing the risk of injury for individuals with hearing difficulties.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEar and HearingSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207