| 1. |
- Bengs, Anette, et al.
(author)
-
Designing for social inclusion of immigrant women : The case of TeaTime
- 2018
-
In: Innovation. The European Journal of Social Science Research. - : Routledge. - 1351-1610 .- 1469-8412. ; 31:2, s. 106-124
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We present our design of a digital service supporting social inclusion among immigrant women in an ethnically and socially diverse neighbourhood of a small Finnish town. The aim is to explore experiences and perceptions as well as potential barriers and challenges for using the web-based service. The case study is framed as design research having a strong user-centred design approach. We describe the design process and present the results of a mixed-method evaluation. The results are scrutinized from the perspectives of experience design. The analysis reveals a potential to facilitate social inclusion through the fulfilment of needs related to relatedness, autonomy, competence, pleasure and stimulations as well as popularity. However, some challenges in the interface design and communication of the security and purpose of the site were identified in the study. Significant differences were also found between immigrant women and local people regarding the need for this digital service.
|
|
| 2. |
- Blomkvist, Pär, 1961-
(author)
-
Fartens entreprenörer och den teknifierade hastigheten : lobbygrupperna och massbilismens framväxt i Sverige under efterkrigstiden
- 2005
-
In: Den jyske historiker. - 0109-9280 .- 1902-472X.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Artiklen undersøger den rolle hastighed, højhastighed og’ flow’ spillede ved etableringen af det svenske bilsamfund. Den fokuserer på de argumenter og strategier billobbyen benyttede sig af i deres promovering af den uhindrede (auto)mobilitet, med særlig fokus på efterkrigstiden, da massebilismen blev en realistisk mulighed. Det lykkedes billobbyen ved hjælp af argumenter med rødder i det nye vejbygnings- og trafikmangementparadigme – ”American Traffic Engineering” - at gøre trafikdebatten til et teknisk spørgsmål.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Boisvert, Isabelle, et al.
(author)
-
Long-Term Asymmetric Hearing Affects Cochlear Implantation Outcomes Differently in Adults with Pre- and Postlingual Hearing Loss
- 2015
-
In: PLOS ONE. - : PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE. - 1932-6203. ; 10:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In many countries, a single cochlear implant is offered as a treatment for a bilateral hearing loss. In cases where there is asymmetry in the amount of sound deprivation between the ears, there is a dilemma in choosing which ear should be implanted. In many clinics, the choice of ear has been guided by an assumption that the reorganisation of the auditory pathways caused by longer duration of deafness in one ear is associated with poorer implantation outcomes for that ear. This assumption, however, is mainly derived from studies of early childhood deafness. This study compared outcomes following implantation of the better or poorer ear in cases of long-term hearing asymmetries. Audiological records of 146 adults with bilateral hearing loss using a single hearing aid were reviewed. The unaided ear had 15 to 72 years of unaided severe to profound hearing loss before unilateral cochlear implantation. 98 received the implant in their long-term sound-deprived ear. A multiple regression analysis was conducted to assess the relative contribution of potential predictors to speech recognition performance after implantation. Duration of bilateral significant hearing loss and the presence of a prelingual hearing loss explained the majority of variance in speech recognition performance following cochlear implantation. For participants with post-lingual hearing loss, similar outcomes were obtained by implanting either ear. With prelingual hearing loss, poorer outcomes were obtained when implanting the long-term sound-deprived ear, but the duration of the sound deprivation in the implanted ear did not reliably predict outcomes. Contrary to an apparent clinical consensus, duration of sound deprivation in one ear has limited value in predicting speech recognition outcomes of cochlear implantation in that ear. Outcomes of cochlear implantation are more closely related to the period of time for which the brain is deprived of auditory stimulation from both ears.
|
|
| 5. |
- Boisvert, Isabelle, et al.
(author)
-
Long-term monaural auditory deprivation and bilateral cochlear implants
- 2012
-
In: NeuroReport. - : Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins. - 0959-4965 .- 1473-558X. ; 23:3, s. 195-199
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Long-term binaural auditory deprivation is associated with poorer speech recognition outcomes after cochlear implantation, even for postlingual hearing loss. It is, however, unknown to what extent the outcomes of implantation are related to the peripheral changes occurring monaurally or to changes at a higher level in the auditory system related to binaural deafness. This retrospective study aimed to unravel peripheral and central contributions to cochlear implantation outcomes by comparing outcomes obtained in individual ears for adults with long-term monaural auditory deprivation (i.e. unilateral use of hearing aid) who received bilateral cochlear implants. Results showed that similar outcomes can be obtained with the implant placed in the auditory-deprived or in the aided ear. This suggests that the peripheral changes related to monaural auditory deprivation have little effect on outcomes of cochlear implantation. NeuroReport 23: 195-199
|
|
| 6. |
- Boisvert, Isabelle, et al.
(author)
-
Monaural sound deprivation; opening a window on central processes underlying cochlear implantation outcomes
- 2011
-
Conference paper (other academic/artistic)abstract
- When considering unilateral cochlear implantation, clinicians must decide which ear should be implanted. This decision process is made more complex in the case of long-term monaural sound-deprivation where a hearing aid is used in the non-deprived ear. Clinical recommendations are not uniform where some clinicians suggest implanting the sound-deprived ear, regardless of the length of deprivation, to preserve the remaining hearing of the non-deprived ear. Others recommend implanting the non-deprived ear, arguing that implanting a recently stimulated ear provides higher outcomes with the implant. The literature discussing implanting the “better” or “worse” ear is inconclusive and none have specifically compared outcomes of implantation in ears with long-term monaural sound-deprivation.The current study draws its findings from cochlear implant centres located in 3 countries. Comparative analyses of cochlear implantation outcomes obtained in adults with monaural sound-deprivation of durations ranging from 15 to 65 years and implanted in the non-deprived (n≈90) or sound-deprived ear (n≈100) have been conducted. The results show that similar functional outcomes can be achieved by both groups when comparing the everyday listening condition (cochlear implant alone or bimodal hearing [i.e. cochlear implant in one ear and hearing aid in the other]). Moreover, higher outcomes were obtained after cochlear implantation by individuals with a long-term monaural sound-deprivation compared to individuals with a long-term bilateral sound-deprivation (n≈15), irrespective of which ear was implanted. These results pave the way to a discussion about central processes underlying cochlear implantation outcomes.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
