Experience of a first hearing aid fitting (Simoneau et al., 2025)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study is the first step in a project aimed at developing an intervention program for new hearing aid (HA) users and their relatives in the Province of Quebec, Canada. The objectives were to describe the experience of a first HA fitting from the perspective of adults with hearing loss and their relatives, to identify facilitators and barriers to the fitting process, and to identify elements that should be included in an intervention program to support HA adoption and use. Satisfaction regarding HAs and fitting services was also assessed after fitting.Method: A mixed-methods design combining qualitative and quantitative data sources was used. Interviews were conducted with 10 new HA users, seven relatives, and 10 hearing care professionals. HA users also completed a questionnaire to assess their satisfaction with HAs and services after fitting. A qualitative content analysis was done on the data obtained from the interviews, and descriptive statistics were used to analyze data on satisfaction.Results: Identified facilitators and barriers to HA fitting for new users were related to professional services, HAs, relatives, and personal factors. Elements for inclusion in the intervention program were categorized into two groups: information to provide and support to offer. Participants reported a high satisfaction level with HAs (M = 87.6 ± 7.5%).Conclusions: Several factors can influence the success of a first HA fitting, including aspects related to technology, professional services, and psychosocial elements. Participants suggested important components to include in the intervention for first-time fittings. These results will be used to develop an intervention program for new HA users and their relatives.Supplemental Material S1. Interviews grids for semi-structured interviews.Simoneau, K., Cormier, L., Lefebvre-Demers, M., Blackburn, M., Côté, C., Boucher, N., Croteau, C., & Hotton, M. (2025). The experience of a first hearing aid fitting: Perspectives from adults with hearing loss, their relatives, and hearing care professionals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 68(11), 5592–5607. https://doi.org/10.1044/2025_JSLHR-25-00162
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".