MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4413358670 · doi:10.5334/ijic.nacic24064

Engaging young adults with disabilities and their families to improve community programming: A Photovoice project

2025· article· en· W4413358670 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alana Armas, A Jay Holmgren

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational Journal of Integrated Care · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMental Health and Patient Involvement
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPhotovoiceMedicineNursingMedical educationPsychologyGerontology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

March of Dimes Canada (MODC) conducted community consultations and found that 58% of parents strongly agreed that there were gaps in services available for young people with disabilities. This led to MODC conducting community-based research to identify new ways to provide family-centered services and programming, while also deepening community connections. We conducted an arts-based research project using Photovoice methodology, which is a powerful research method that has been used by marginalized communities for many years to capture their experiences and perspectives. The study population for this project included youth aged 6 to 25 who are living with a disability; and parents/guardians of children/youth living with a disability. Participants were asked to take and caption photos based on a series of prompts that focused on: () what participants viewed as program strengths and gaps, (2) how they navigate the social and health systems, (3) participants interests, hopes and dreams, and (4) the barriers they face in their everyday lives. Between January 2023 and May 2024, a total of 29 participants from across Canada completed four separate photo activities exploring the foci described above. The participants also completed interviews and focus groups to further discuss their experiences and share their reflections on the photos they captured. Study activities were designed and reviewed by youth and parent advisory committees, ensuring the photo prompts, methods, interviews and focus group discussions were grounded in community interests and needs. To date we have identified five overarching findings: ) Community programs and services are not inclusive and accessible for young people with disabilities and their families/caregivers, with transportation presenting a key barrier; 2) community programs and services do not align with the actual needs of young people with disabilities, specifically young people are looking to connect socially with others and build a sense of belonging; 3) there are many unmet needs for families/caregivers of young people with disabilities, including supporting their mental health and well-being; 4) it is difficult to learn about and navigate both health and social care services; and 5) the transition to adulthood continues to be difficult for young people with disabilities. Currently, our organization is using these findings to improve current programming and inform the development of new, family-centered programming across Canada. This study has shown that young people with disabilities and their families still face many challenges when seeking the support they need to thrive in their communities. It is clear that as we move to improve integrated health and social care systems, we need to authentically engage with communities to ensure we are meeting their actual needs. Organizations and service providers also need to think carefully about accessibility, from transportation, to navigating physical and online spaces, as well easily accessing the right care at the right time. Using the findings from this work to inform program design and improvement is imperative to creating an accessible and barrier-free Canada where everyone can thrive.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,489
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,973

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0180,004
Communication savante0,0030,001
Science ouverte0,0020,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,072
Tête enseignante GPT0,401
Écart entre enseignants0,329 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational Journal of Integrated Care→Même sujetMental Health and Patient Involvement→Travaux en français237 207→