Continuum of Care for Older Adults With Concurrent Hearing and Vision Impairment: A Systematic Review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and Objectives A global report estimates up to 2% of the world population experience concurrent hearing and vision impairment (dual sensory impairment [DSI]). Older adults with DSI are often frequent users of health care, yet the evidence is limited to inform care delivery for this population. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence on tools and strategies for screening, assessment, and interventions that promote a continuum of care for older adults with DSI. Research Design and Methods The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews. Electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Global Health, and Web of Science) and clinical trial registries (ISRCTN Registry, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched. The quality appraisal was performed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results Of 4,775 identified references, 28 records were selected. The review identified 7 tools and 7 strategies for DSI-specific screening, assessments, and/or interventions. Some of the most promising tools were the interRAI Community Health Assessment with deafblind supplement, adapted Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and the Severe Dual Sensory Loss screening tool. Useful strategies included the use of alternative forms of communication, assistive devices or technology, education and training for service providers, and training of older adults on the use and maintenance of assistive aids/technology. However, quality appraisal indicated a need for more robust evidence to inform clinical practice. Discussion and Implications Reviewed evidence pinpointed the need for training for health care providers on DSI-specific challenges and supports and the use of integrated multidisciplinary care for older adults. Future studies need to explore the development and evaluation of tools and interventions to improve the continuum of care for this group. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO registration # CRD42020180545
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it