MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404889786 · doi:10.33448/rsd-v13i11.47498

Revisão integrativa: Habilidades cognitivas em programas de treinamentos auditivos em idosos usuários de Aparelho de Amplificação Sonora Individual

2024· article· pt· W4404889786 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Monteiro Magrini, Ana Carla Oliveira Garcia

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Society and Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing Loss and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trata-se de uma revisão integrativa (RI) da literatura, com objetivo de descrever quais aspectos cognitivos são vistos e exercitados nos programas de treinamento auditivo em idosos usuários de aparelhos auditivos. A questão norteadora foi “Quais habilidades cognitivas são exercitadas nos treinamentos auditivos informais em idosos usuários de aparelho de amplificação sonora individual (AASI)?” Os critérios de inclusão estabelecidos foram: artigos publicados nos últimos 10 anos (2014- 2024), em português, inglês ou espanhol, na faixa etária populacional a partir de 60 anos, que se enquadrava na temática proposta. Os critérios de exclusão foram artigos duplicados nas bases de dados, artigos que após a leitura do resumo e/ou leitura completa não se enquadravam na pergunta da pesquisa e estudos que se referiam a implante coclear. A coleta resultou em 106 artigos (BVS=32; 30,2%/ PubMed= 28; 26,4%/ Cochrane= 46; 43,4%), sendo 22 artigos duplicados entre as bases de dados e após a primeira leitura referente ao título e resumo foram excluídos 69 estudos. Dessa forma, resultou em 15 artigos para serem lidos na integra. Após a leitura detalhada desses estudos, 11 manuscritos foram excluídos, restando quatro artigos. A presente revisão integrativa acrescentou um panorama que poderá direcionar os pesquisadores e clínicos em duas prerrogativas: antecipar a reflexão quanto ao planejamento e estruturação de futuras pesquisas e intervenções clínicas envolvendo o treinamento cognitivo em idosos usuários de AASI.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Society and DevelopmentSame topicHearing Loss and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207