Assessment of family needs in children with physical disabilities: development of a family needs inventory
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Valid tools to assess family needs for children with physical disabilities are needed to help tune paediatric rehabilitation care processes to individual needs of these families. To create such a family needs inventory, needs of families of children with a physical disability (age 0-18 years) were identified. We examined differences in the number and type of needs listed by families when asked for by means of an interview compared with using an inventory. METHODS: Forty-nine families of children with a wide variety of physical disabilities (mean age 7.7 years; SD 4.6) participated in semi-structured interviews, focusing on family needs. They also checked an inventory of 99 items (based on a previously conducted literature review), regarding their family needs. In addition, individual interviews with healthcare professionals, and panel meetings with healthcare professionals and parents were held to further identify relevant family needs for the inventory. RESULTS: The individual parent and healthcare professional interviews raised 41 needs that were not included in the original inventory of 99 items. Moreover, the panel meetings raised a further 49 needs. After restructuring and reformulating several items, a 187-item Family Needs Inventory - Paediatric Rehabilitation (FNI-PR) was created. The parent interviews revealed significantly less family needs (mean number of needs = 10.8; SD = 6.0) compared with using the inventory (mean number of needs = 31.7; SD = 19.7) (P < 0.0001). Most expressed family needs were related to both general and specific information concerning the child's development and treatment, aids and information about legislation and to rules relating to compensation of costs. CONCLUSION: Based on responses of parents and healthcare professionals the FNI-PR has been developed, a comprehensive inventory for family needs that can be used in paediatric rehabilitation. An inventory checked by parents resulted in more family needs than a single open-ended question. The inventory may facilitate the implementation of family-centred care.
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 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, 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 ».