INTERPROFESSIONAL HEALTH CARE: INTEGRATING AUDIOLOGY AND GERIATRICS IN INTERNATIONAL SETTINGS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hearing is fundamental to communication and important for quality of life and overall health of older adults. Despite a potentially large role in how patients engage in healthcare, its importance is underrecognized in healthcare settings. Decreased patient-provider communication and poor treatment understanding may drive decreased satisfaction with healthcare services and avoidance of routine medical care, resulting in poorer health outcomes for older adults with hearing loss. Additionally, despite a high prevalence of hearing loss, less than 20% of those who could potentially benefit from hearing healthcare use hearing aids, potentially exacerbating sequalae of hearing loss in healthcare settings. Amidst growing recognition of the need for inter-professional healthcare collaboration, this session will focus on how audiologists and hearing specialists may partner with other healthcare providers (pharmacists, nurses, physicians) to address hearing needs in primary care, specialty care and hospital settings. We will include perspectives from the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada. We will describe factors that facilitate and impede communication between pharmacists and patients with hearing loss in the community pharmacy. We will also present results of a mixed-methods study from an interdisciplinary team (gerontology, public health, audiology, and otolaryngology/ear nose throat (ENT)) to inform primary care/ENT physicians about preferences for hearing treatment among Black women in the United States. Within a hospital setting, we will present how audiologist-nurse partnerships impact delirium. We will conclude with a discussion of how policy for hearing aid coverage impacts primary care providers recommendations for hearing healthcare in the United States.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".