Justification for Integrated Care of Dementia and Presbycusis: Focused on National Dementia Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia management has become one of essential factors in the national policy globally in terms of the elderly health care service. In the brief communication, we compared various national reports from other countries to see whether current care service for the dementia had integrative approach for the patients with hearing loss in Korea. We also discussed a need of systematic hearing care for the elderly with dementia who was also a suspected case of aged-related hearing loss because many studies had confirmed that untreated hearing loss has a negative effect on dementia and vice versa. After analyzing the national policy from several countries, we found that the systems had been well established to screen dementia patients by using various clinical tests in UK, Canada, and Japan who provided appropriate services by classifying types of the dementia. Remarkably, the hearing test was included as the testing protocol for the dementia in Canada and the experts such as speech pathologists and music therapists had worked in a non-pharmacotherapy program for the elderly with dementia in France. Unfortunately, the dementia policy of Korea needs to be refined when considering the hearing care/management in that the integrated management of hearing and dementia are important. In addition, the clinicians who work for the dementia care home need to know audiological knowledge. Since the auditory training and rehabilitation for the elderly can reduce increased rate of cognitive decline, we strongly recommend that auditory training should be a part of the cognitive rehabilitation programs in the dementia care home.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".