MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389228382 · doi:10.3397/in_2023_0789

A questionnaire survey on the prevalence of self-reported voice disorders in school teachers, and classroom noise in Japan

2023· article· en· W4389228382 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Naoko Evans, Miki Kaneko, Taiki Shigematsu, Hirokazu Sakamoto, Ken Kiyono

Bibliographic record

VenueNOISE-CON proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVoice and Speech Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)School teachersCompromiseMedical educationPsychologyThroatQuality (philosophy)QuestionnaireMedicineNoise (video)Family medicineMathematics educationSociologyGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

School teachers are known as professional voice users, hence any damage to their voice or throat could compromise their work as well as their lives. We conducted a questionnaire survey of 830 teachers working at elementary schools, junior-high schools, high schools and schools for children with special needs in Saitama prefecture in Japan. We investigated the prevalence of self-reported voice disorders in teachers and how their quality of life might be influenced. We also asked the teachers to share some of their experience with noise in classrooms. We found the following three points. Firstly, more than a quarter have consulted medical doctors for problems with their voice or throat. Secondly, quality of life of female teachers are slightly more affected by their voice problems than their male peers. Thirdly, approximately 20 percent of teachers are concerned about the noise in their classrooms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNOISE-CON proceedingsSame topicVoice and Speech DisordersFrench-language works237,207