Communicative participation of school-aged children with cochlear implants: parental perceptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study aimed to explore parents' perceptions regarding the communication of their school-aged child with cochlear implants (CIs) in various social contexts. To this end, the construct of "communicative participation" (World Health Organization (2001), International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health, https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health) was broadly applied to the population of children with CIs. Nineteen parents participated in semi-structured interviews and described their perceptions and experiences regarding the communication of their child in social contexts. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. The results showed that overall, despite describing very positive outcomes with CIs, parents reported that their children do experience participation restrictions and activity limitations because of communication difficulties and/or environmental and social barriers. The findings from this study unveiled the communication difficulties of school-aged children with CIs, as experienced by their parents. These difficulties-which may seem subtle-can significantly impact the participation in communication. Language interventions could be improved to better support pupils who are experienced CI users.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".