The Prevalence of Hearing, Vision, and Dual Sensory Loss in Older Canadians: An Analysis of Data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to describe the prevalence of hearing loss (HL), vision loss (VL), and dual sensory loss (DSL) in Canadians 45-85 years of age. Audiometry and visual acuity were measured. Various levels of impairment severity were described. Results were extrapolated to the 2016 Canadian population. In 2016, 1,500,000 Canadian males 45-85 years of age had at least mild HL, 1,800,000 had at least mild VL, and 570,000 had DSL. Among females, 1,200,000 had at least mild HL, 2,200,000 had at least mild VL, and 450,000 had DSL. Among Canadians 45-85 years of age, mild, moderate, and severe HL was prevalent among 13.4 per cent, 3.7 per cent, and 0.4 per cent of males, and among 11.3 per cent, 2.3 per cent, and 0.2 per cent of females, respectively. Mild and moderate, or severe VL was prevalent among 19.8 per cent and 2.4 per cent of males, and among 23.9 per cent and 2.6 per cent of females, respectively. At least mild DSL was prevalent among 6.4 per cent of males and 6.1 per cent of females.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".