S12-2: Perceptions of the #Wethe15 campaign to promote rights of physical activity among people with disabilities
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Purpose Since 1948, the Paralympic Games are a platform that gives opportunities to persons with disabilities for competitions akin to the Olympic games. This may be seen as fulfilment of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities . Article 30, where people with disabilities have the to participate in cultural life, recreation, leisure and sport on an equal basis with others. It is less known, how the disability community see the acceptability of these games. A campaign to raise awareness is through the #Wethe15 campaign. This study aimed to investigate the initial perceptions of the #Wethe15 campaign after the 2021 Paralympic Games. Methods Interviews and focus groups with representatives of disability rights groups from Canada, Finland, Malawi, Peru and the United Kingdom were carried out to investigate perceptions about the #Wethe15 campaign. The main questions were related to how the disability community could contribute or benefit from the campaign. Data were then translated, then transcribed in English and analysed through thematic analyses mapped against the concepts of availability, accessibility, and acceptability. Results In late 2021, 29 representatives (20 with lived experience of disability) took part in five focus groups and interviews. The campaign was deemed as acceptable due to the positive sentiment about the campaign to promote disability rights and sport in society. Yet, as #Wethe15 does not translate well into some non-English languages, more instructions of how to make it culturally appropriate was needed to broaden access to the main message of the campaign. Conclusions The campaign brought awareness of disabilities in society, yet the rights of physical activity to people with disabilities was less obvious, particularly regarding availability and accessibility. Partners of the movement need to find ways to fund mechanisms to promote more quality, accessibility and availability, while recognising the health benefits from participation in physical activity. Funding The study was commissioned by the IPC. The IPC had no influence the recruitment of the participants or interpretation of the results.
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 | 0,015 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 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 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 ».