P-577 A TIME-DEPENDENT HOLISTIC MODEL OF HEARING PROTECTION DEVICES (HPD) USE: THE EFFECT OF TIME ON HPD COMFORT AND HPD-RELATED HEALTH BEHAVIORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Hearing protection devices (HPDs) are widely used to reduce noise exposure in workplaces. The effectiveness of this noise control strategy is questionable, however, as HPDs are sometimes not used at all, or are used inconsistently and/or incorrectly. Methods Understanding these unhealthy behaviors and their origins is therefore essential in order to propose solutions to improve the effectiveness of this preventive measure against noise-induced hearing loss. Results Numerous models based on social cognition theories identified the significant factors facilitating or hindering the workers’ health behaviors related to the HPDs use. Nevertheless, these models did not focus on physical and psychosocial characteristics of the triad “environment/person/HPD” which can influence HPDs use. Following a transdisciplinary approach, this communication presents a time-dependent holistic model of HPD use, based on the integration of a comfort model adapted to HPDs into an existing behavioral model. A comfort model dedicated to HPDs was first developed to account for the complex mechanisms from which comfort-related barriers and benefits originate. This model was then integrated in an existing social cognition model to predict HPD-related health behaviors accounting for the comfort dimensions (physical, functional, acoustical, psychological) and the influence of the triad. Discussion and conclusion Finally, the temporal dimension of behavioral change was taken into account to capture the scope of change in HPD-related health behaviors. This holistic description of HPDs use could be applied to: (i) identify the characteristics of the triad significantly associated to comfort and HPD-related health behaviors; (ii) improve hearing protection training programs; and (iii) increase HPDs use to prevent hearing loss among workers.
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 | 0.002 | 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".