Impact of Mild to Moderate U-shape Hearing Loss on Listening Effort in School-aged Children with Alport Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, we aimed to investigate the effect of mild to moderate U-shape hearing loss on listening effort in Alport syndrome (AS) children by pupillometry. Subjects were required to answer questions after listening to conversations that simulate real scenes in daily life. We recorded the accuracy rate and pupil data of two conditions: SNR = + 15 dB and SNR = -2 dB. A mixed effect model was established to analyze the influence of SNR, mid-frequency energy proportion and hearing status on the accuracy and pupil response. The results showed SNR had a main effect on the accuracy. The baseline pupil diameter of AS children was always smaller than normal hearing children. When analyzing the time window including the stages of listening to the conversation, listening to the question and thinking, SNR and the hearing status had main effect on mean pupil dilation. We concluded that AS children with hearing loss were often in a state of low arousal before auditory task. Both hearing status and task difficulty have impact on listening effort of AS children. The effort of AS children with U-shape hearing loss might come mainly from consequent cognitive processing (as a consequence of effortful listening) instead of passive listening during speech communication.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".