Family ecology of young children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Family ecology in early childhood may influence children's activity and participation in daily life. The aim of this study was to describe family functioning, family expectations of their children, family support to their children, and supports for families of young children with cerebral palsy (CP) based on children's gross motor function level. METHODS: Participants were 398 children with CP (mean age = 44.9 months) and their parents residing in the USA and Canada. Parents completed four measures of family ecology, the Family Environment Scale (FES), Family Expectations of Child (FEC), Family Support to Child (FSC) and Family Support Scale (FSS). RESULTS: The median scores on the FES indicated average to high family functioning and the median score on the FSS indicated that families had helpful family supports. On average, parents reported high expectations of their children on the FEC and strong support to their children on the FSC. On the FES, higher levels of achievement orientation were reported by parents of children in Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level II than parents of children in level I, and higher levels of control were reported by parents of children in level I than parents of children in level IV. On the FEC, parents of children with limited gross motor function (level V) reported lower expectations than parents of children at all other levels. CONCLUSIONS: Family ecology, including family strengths, expectations, interests, supports and resources, should be discussed when providing interventions and supports for young children with CP and their families.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".