Social communication and quality of life in children using hearing aids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the parent-reported structural language and social communication skills-measured with the Children's Communication Checklist-2 (CCC-2)-and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL)-measured with the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL)-of children who use hearing aids (HAs) and their typical-hearing (TH) peers. DESIGN: The participants were 88 children (age range of 5; 6 to 13; 1 (years; months)) and their parents: 45 children with bilateral moderate to severe hearing loss using HAs who had no additional disabilities and 43 children with typical hearing. The groups were matched based on chronological age, gender, nonverbal IQ, and parental education level. The parents completed questionnaires related to their children's communication skills, including subdomains structural language and social communication, and HR-QOL. RESULTS: The HA group had significantly poorer overall communication skills than the TH group (r = 0.49). The children in the HA group scored significantly lower than the TH group on both structural language (r = 0.37) and social communication (r = 0.41). Half of the children in the HA group had overall communication scores that either indicated concern or required further investigation according to the instrument's manual. In terms of psychosocial functioning, which was measured as HR-QOL, the subdomain school functioning was the main driver of the difference between groups, with the HA group being at least twice as likely (OR = 2.52) as the TH group to have poor HR-QOL in the school domain. Better parent-reported social communication was associated with better parent-reported psychosocial functioning in the children using HAs-even when background variables were taken into account. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that traditional assessments and interventions targeting structural aspects of language may overlook social communication difficulties in children with HAs, even those with no additional disabilities. As school functioning stood out as the most problematic domain for children with HAs, efforts to improve the well-being of these children should focus on this area.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".