A systematic review of disability awareness interventions for children and youth
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose: Children’s lack of knowledge about disability can adversely impact their attitudes toward people with disabilities. The purpose of this study is to review the common elements of effective disability awareness interventions. Methods: A systematic review of disability awareness interventions for children and youth was conducted to assess the effective components of these interventions. Electronic searches were conducted using OVID, CENTRAL, PsychInfo, ERIC, Social Science Citation Index, GreyNET Scopus and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria included (i) an intervention raising awareness about disability, (ii) school-age children with the average age between 5–19 years old, (iii) at least one measurable outcome focusing on knowledge about disability or attitudes towards and/or acceptance of people with a disability and (iv) published article or grey literature. Results: Of the 1031 articles that were identified in the search, 42 met the criteria to be included in the review. We classified the disability awareness interventions into 5 broad types including (i) social contact, (ii) simulation, (iii) curriculum, (iv) multi-media curriculum and (v) multiple components. Thirty-four studies showed an improvement in attitudes towards and/or acceptance of peers with disabilities. Eight of these studies also demonstrated an improvement in knowledge of people with disabilities. Five of the interventions found no support for improving knowledge about, or acceptance of people with disabilities. Conclusion: Disability awareness interventions can successfully improve children’s knowledge about and attitudes towards peers with a disability; they should include several different components over multiple sessions. Relevance: These findings are being used to further develop disability awareness interventions to help improve the social inclusion and participation of children with disabilities within mainstream classrooms.Implications for RehabilitationWell-designed disability awareness interventions for children and youth can help improve knowledge about disability, attitudes towards people with a disability and acceptance of peers with a disability.Rehabilitation health care providers and educators should be trained to recognize when children with disabilities are being socially excluded and be prepared to provide or recommend appropriate resources and interventions on how to address this issue.Clinicians, educators and children with disabilities should all be involved in the development of disability awareness programs.Educators should carefully choose an appropriate intervention to meet the needs of the children in their class while considering age appropriateness and diversity of the students. It is also important for educators to be cognizant of the broader societal influences that impact attitudes towards disability.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,055 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».