MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118447675 · doi:10.1016/j.anr.2021.01.001

Personal Listening Device Use Habits, Listening Belief, and Perceived Change in Hearing Among Adolescents

2021· article· en· W3118447675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hee-Jeong Lee, Ihn Sook Jeong

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Nursing Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningDescriptive statisticsLogistic regressionPsychologyHearing lossAudiologyTest (biology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: This study aimed to identify personal listening device (PLD) usage habits, listening belief, and perceived change in hearing, and to investigate how the variables related to perceived change in hearing among adolescents. METHODS: test, Mann-Whitney U test, and hierarchical multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Most students started to use PLDs from elementary school, and mean preferred listening level was 70.13 dB. Mean perceived susceptibility to music-induced hearing loss (MIHL) and perceived barriers to prevent MIHL were 5.18 and 3.40, respectively. Perceived change in hearing was reported on 14.2% of middle school students and 32.2% of high school students, and as the average score of perceived barriers to prevent MIHL increases by one point, the odds of decrease in hearing increase by 2.05 times (p < .001) and 1.35 times (p < .05), respectively. CONCLUSION: Considering that most adolescents are exposed to PLD in elementary schools and about a quarter experienced a decrease in hearing after PLD use, educational programs on hearing conservation are required to start as early as in schools. Particularly, knowledge and skills to overcome barriers to prevent MIHL should be emphasized in educational programs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.169
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Nursing ResearchSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207