A Newly Identified Impairment in Both Vision and Hearing Increases the Risk of Deterioration in Both Communication and Cognitive Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vision and hearing impairments are highly prevalent in adults 65 years of age and older. There is a need to understand their association with multiple health-related outcomes. We analyzed data from the Resident Assessment Instrument for Home Care (RAI-HC). Home care clients were followed for up to 5 years and categorized into seven unique cohorts based on whether or not they developed new vision and/or hearing impairments. An absolute standardized difference (stdiff) of at least 0.2 was considered statistically meaningful. Most clients (at least 60%) were female and 34.9 per cent developed a new sensory impairment. Those with a new concurrent vison and hearing impairment were more likely than those with no sensory impairments to experience a deterioration in receptive communication (stdiff = 0.68) and in cognitive performance (stdiff = 0.49). After multivariate adjustment, they had a twofold increased odds (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1,87, 2.35) of deterioration in cognitive performance. Changes in sensory functioning are common and have important effects on multiple health-related outcomes.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".