Early rehabilitation service utilization patterns in young children with developmental delays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is a growing demand for interdisciplinary rehabilitation services for children with developmental disabilities, however, information is lacking on service utilization patterns. This study describes the type, frequency and location of initial rehabilitation services provided to young children recently diagnosed with a developmental delay. METHODS: A telephone survey was conducted on a consecutive cohort of children referred to subspecialists for the first investigation of their delay. RESULTS: Out of 129 respondents, only 30 (23%) did not receive any rehabilitation services within the first 6 months following medical evaluation, and 61 (47%) received two or more services. Services were provided most frequently in the hospital setting, especially for occupational or physical therapy (73-80%). Services were less often rendered in a rehabilitation centre (5-13%) or in the community (< 10%). Services were provided privately for a subset, particularly for speech language pathology and psychology (34% and 30% respectively). Interventions were typically given weekly or bi-weekly. Children receiving physical therapy were significantly younger whereas children referred to speech language pathology were older than the age of our cohort at intake. Overall, parents' educational level did not influence services received with the exception of private services, which were more likely to occur in children of fathers with university education. CONCLUSIONS: The findings would suggest that long waiting times and lack of resources may limit access to comprehensive services, particularly in community settings. Service utilization patterns were not consistent within types of developmental disability, suggesting that formal and co-ordinated interdisciplinary programmes are not in place for this population of interest.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".