Perceptions of Adults With Hearing Loss About the Communication Difficulties Generated by the COVID-19 Preventive Measures: A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The COVID-19 pandemic led to the implementation of preventive measures that exacerbated communication difficulties for individuals with hearing loss. This study aims to explore the perception of adults with hearing loss about the communication difficulties caused by the preventive measures and about their experiences with communication 1 year after the adoption of these preventive measures. METHOD: Individual semistructured interviews were conducted via videoconference with six adults who have hearing loss from the province of Québec, Canada. Data were examined using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The study found that face masks and in-person work (i.e., in opposition to remote work) were important barriers to communication because of hindered lipreading and competing noise in many workplaces. In contrast, preventive measures that allowed visual information transmission (e.g., transparent face masks, fixed plastic partitions) were considered favorable for communication. Communication partners were perceived as playing an important role in communication success with preventive measures: Familiar communication partners improved communication, whereas those with poor attitude or strategies hindered communication. Participants found that videoconferences could provide satisfactory communication but were sometimes hindered by issues such as bad audiovisual quality or too many participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified reduced access to speech reading and lack of general awareness about hearing issues as key barriers to communication during the pandemic. The decreased communication capabilities were perceived to be most problematic at work and during health appointments, and tended to cause frustration, anxiety, self-esteem issues, and social isolation. Suggestions are outlined for current and future public health measures to better consider the experience of people with hearing loss.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".