MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801351705

Use of Acoustical Standards in the Audiology classroom

2017· article· en· W2801351705 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Christian Giguère

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian acoustics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNoise Effects and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyCurriculumActive listeningHearing aidScope (computer science)Perspective (graphical)Medical educationEngineeringAudiologyComputer sciencePsychologyMedicinePedagogyCommunicationLinguistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Audiologists are primary providers of hearing healthcare. As part of their scope of practice, they perform detailed evaluations of the auditory function, prescribe hearing aids and other assistive listening devices, offer counseling and aural rehabilitation services, and participate in hearing loss prevention activities. In Canada, Audiology is taught at the Master’s Degree level, typically in an intensive 2-year program. Applicants are from a wide variety of disciplines (e.g. psychology, linguistics, education, health sciences) where acoustic measurements and use of electroacoustic instruments (e.g. audiometers, hearing aid analyzers) are not part of the curriculum. From a pedagogical perspective, acoustical standards provide an important vehicle for introducing proper terminology and keys concepts in acoustics and instrumentation. Through laboratory assignments and other learning activities, hands-on experience can be gained on the operation, calibration and tolerance limits of clinical instruments. From a professional perspective, self-regulated health colleges such as the College of Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists of Ontario issue Practice Standards and Guidelines (PSGs) and/or position statements on equipment use and servicing requirements for their Members that refer to specific acoustical standards, especially from the ANSI S3 series on Bioacoustics. This paper will focus on the use of audiometry standards (e.g. ANSI S3.1, ANSI S3.6) and hearing aid characteristics (e.g. ANSI S3.22) in the Audiology classroom as well as other CSA and ISO standards relevant to the profession.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.008

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian acousticsSame topicNoise Effects and ManagementFrench-language works237,207