MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013259530 · doi:10.2196/17193

Evaluating a Theoretically Informed and Cocreated Mobile Health Educational Intervention for First-Time Hearing Aid Users: Qualitative Interview Study

2020· article· en· W3013259530 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David W. Maidment, Rachel Heyes, Rachel Gomez, Neil Coulson, Heather Wharrad, Melanie Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of NottinghamDepartment of Health and Social CareNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsThematic analysisInteractivityIntervention (counseling)Hearing aidApplied psychologymHealthHearing lossPsychologyQualitative researchComputer scienceMedical educationMultimediaPsychological interventionNursingMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adults living with hearing loss have highly variable knowledge of hearing aids, resulting in suboptimal use or nonuse. This issue can be addressed by the provision of high-quality educational resources. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the everyday experiences of first-time hearing aid users when using a newly developed, theoretically informed cocreated mobile health (mHealth) educational intervention called m2Hear. This intervention aims to deliver greater opportunities for individualization and interactivity compared with our previously developed multimedia intervention, C2Hear. METHODS: A total of 16 first-time hearing aid users trialed m2Hear for a period of 10-weeks in their everyday lives, after which individual semistructured interviews were completed. The data were analyzed using an established deductive thematic analysis procedure underpinned by the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior model. The model stipulates that to engage in a target behavior, an individual must have physical and psychological capability, physical and social opportunity, and automatic and reflective motivation. RESULTS: Capability-m2Hear was viewed as a concise and comprehensive resource, suitable for a range of digital literacy skills. It was stated that m2Hear could be conveniently reused to provide useful reminders that facilitate knowledge of hearing aids and communication. Opportunity-m2Hear was simple and straightforward to use, enabling greater individualization and independence. The availability of m2Hear via mobile technologies also improved accessibility. Motivation-m2Hear provided greater support and reassurance, improving confidence and empowering users to self-manage their hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this qualitative study suggests that m2Hear supports first-time hearing aid users to successfully self-manage their hearing loss postfitting. Furthermore, this study demonstrates the utility of employing a combined theoretical and ecologically valid approach in the development of mHealth educational resources to meet the individual self-management needs of adults living with hearing loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03136718; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03136718.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.237
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207