Speech-in-noise, psychosocial, and heart rate variability outcomes of group singing or audiobook club interventions for older adults with unaddressed hearing loss: A SingWell Project multisite, randomized controlled trial, registered report protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unaddressed age-related hearing loss is highly prevalent among older adults, typified by negative consequences for speech-in-noise perception and psychosocial wellbeing. There is promising evidence that group singing may enhance speech-in-noise perception and psychosocial wellbeing. However, there is a lack of robust evidence, primarily due to the literature being based on small sample sizes, single site studies, and a lack of randomized controlled trials. Hence, to address these concerns, this SingWell Project study utilizes an appropriately powered sample size, multisite, randomized controlled trial approach, with a robust preplanned statistical analysis. OBJECTIVE: To explore if group singing may improve speech-in-noise perception and psychosocial wellbeing for older adults with unaddressed hearing loss. METHODS: We designed an international, multisite, randomized controlled trial to explore the benefits of group singing for adults aged 60 years and older with unaddressed hearing loss (registered at clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT06580847). After undergoing an eligibility screening process and completing an information and consent form, we intend to recruit 210 participants that will be randomly assigned to either group singing or an audiobook club (control group) intervention for a training period of 12-weeks. The study has multiple timepoints for testing, that are broadly categorized as macro (i.e., pre- and post-measures across the 12-weeks), or micro timepoints (i.e., pre- and post-measures across a weekly training session). Macro measures include behavioural measures of speech and music perception, and psychosocial questionnaires. Micro measures include psychosocial questionnaires and heart-rate variability. HYPOTHESES: We hypothesize that group singing may be effective at improving speech perception and psychosocial outcomes for adults aged 60 years and older with unaddressed hearing loss-more so than participants in the control group.
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 | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.004 |
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".