A qualitative study of the role of hearing aid use and physical fit accessories in a sample of older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the study was to qualitatively describe the experiences of hearing aid and physical fit accessories use during physical activity and exercise participation in a sample of older adults with hearing loss. DESIGN: A prospective qualitative research design was employed with the use of focus groups with older adult participants who were fitted with hearing aids and physical fit accessories. STUDY SAMPLE: Twelve older adults with hearing loss (six experienced and six new hearing aid users, age range 64 - 88 years) were recruited in this study. RESULTS: The barriers to hearing at physical activity and exercise environments were related to reverberation, loud music, and instructor's location and position relative to exercise members, whereas facilitators were aided hearing, the instructor projecting their voice and demonstrating the moves. The most preferred physical fit accessories were the retention lock and the corded and cordless hearing aid sleeves. The least preferred accessories were the hearing aid-to-glasses connector and stick'n stay tape. CONCLUSIONS: Individual differences and needs were factored into different perspectives on hearing aid and physical fit accessory use, emphasising patient-centered approach when coaching and counselling on device use for physical activity and exercise.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".