MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972502969 · doi:10.3109/17483107.2012.685500

Measurement of the product attitudes of youth during the selection of assistive technology devices

2012· article· en· W1972502969 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen E. Ryan, Susan Klejman, Barbara E. Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive Technology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairSocializationScale (ratio)Product (mathematics)PsychologyFocus groupSelection (genetic algorithm)Applied psychologyKnowledge managementComputer scienceSocial psychologyMarketingBusinessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This article proposes a conceptual underpinning for and examines the validity of the Youth Evaluation of Products (YEP) scale when used to measure the AT device attitudes of youth. Method: Consumer socialization is promoted to improve the utility of an AT device selection framework for children and youth and inform the development of the YEP scale. A descriptive, qualitative mixed-methods design explored the validity of the scale when used by six manual wheelchair users, aged 11–14 years, to evaluate a new pushrim-activated, power-assisted wheelchair. Three youth participated in a subsequent focus group to share how they assessed wheelchair products. Results: The items and dimensions of the YEP scale corresponded well to participants’ views about wheelchairs. Conclusions: Consumer socialization provides a new way to understand the developing role of youth as AT consumers and the YEP scale is emerging as a way to measure their product attitudes. When integrated with contemporary thinking about the assessment and selection of AT devices, providers and parents may be better able to incorporate the product perspectives of youth during this shared decision-making process.Implications for RehabilitationUnderstanding the perspectives of consumers during the AT device assessment and selection process leads to better assistive technology outcomes.Current thinking about children as consumers and the AT device selection process informs the measurement of product attitudes of youth.Child-report questionnaires that reliably measure product attitudes provide parents, assistive technology providers and researchers a practical way to explore the product views and preferences of young consumers.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and Rehabilitation Assistive TechnologySame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207