Parental perceived value of a diagnosis for intellectual disability (ID): A qualitative comparison of families with and without a diagnosis for their child's ID
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Although new technologies such as array genomic hybridization to diagnosis the cause of intellectual disabilities (ID) are exciting to clinicians, the value of an etiological diagnosis to the families of affected children is largely unknown. Parents of 20 children with ID, 10 with and 10 without a causal or an etiological diagnosis were interviewed in depth about the value they place on such a diagnosis. They were asked about experiences acquiring services, use of support groups, interactions with family and friends, and opinions on prenatal diagnosis. Parents were also asked whether their child's diagnostic status had influenced these events or affected the couple's reproductive decisions. Finally, parents were asked whether their interest regarding the importance of an etiological diagnosis had changed over time. Interview transcripts were analyzed to determine values parents place on etiological diagnoses and comparisons were made between the two groups. These parents felt the need for a diagnosis most intensely when developmental concerns were first noted, and most parents agreed that this intensity diminished over time. All would have preferred to have an etiological diagnosis, but for some the only reason was curiosity. Validation was the most important value attributed to a diagnosis: it offered legitimacy for the child's behavior and appearance. However, a descriptive label, such as autism, was often more useful to parents than a rare but specific etiological diagnosis. Surprisingly, between the two groups there were no differences in the parents' perceptions or experiences related to the presence or absence of an etiological diagnosis for their child's ID.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle