The impact of cognition on hearTest administration in older adults receiving home care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective This study investigated the impact of cognitive function on the administration of the hearTest automated hearing test in older adults. The relationship between Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score and three hearTest metrics (false response rate, standard deviation of response time, and test duration) was analysed.Design A cross-sectional correlational design was used. Testing was conducted in participants’ homes or retirement villages.Study Sample One hundred and five older adults (aged 67–97 years) receiving home-based aged care with MoCA scores ranging between 5 (possible dementia) and 30 (healthy cognition).Results There was no relationship between MoCA score and false response rate (r = −0.12, CI = −0.42 to 0.06, p = 0.22) or standard deviation of response time (r = −0.11, CI = −0.33 to 0.04, p = 0.27). There was a moderate sized correlation between MoCA score and test duration (r = −0.31, CI = − 0.49 to − 0.15, p = 0.001), indicating longer test duration with lower MoCA scores.Conclusions hearTest performance is not impacted by cognitive ability in a population of older adults that included people living with dementia. However, additional test time may be needed for hearTest administration for individuals with cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".