MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987625860 · doi:10.3109/09638288.2014.892158

Weather, disability, vulnerability, and resilience: exploring how youth with physical disabilities experience winter

2014· article· en· W1987625860 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sally Lindsay, Nicole Yantzi

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulnerability (computing)Resilience (materials science)PsychologyPsychological resilienceGerontologyMedicineComputer securitySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Having a mobility-related disability can create numerous challenges in navigating the physical and built environment, especially during winter. Such weather-related challenges can be a significant barrier to participation in everyday activities and are linked with increased physical and psychological morbidities. Unfortunately, mobility research – especially among youth – has often overlooked the effects of winter weather. Methods: This study explores the experiences of daily activities during Canadian winter among a purposive sample of youth, aged 15–22, who have a physical disability requiring the use of a mobility device. The researchers applied a qualitative design, including 12 in-depth interviews. Results: Our findings show that youth encounter several vulnerabilities to participating in social and recreational activities in winter, including: (1) physical barriers and social spatial exclusion; (2) health and safety concerns; and (3) psychosocial issues (i.e. worry, isolation and dependence). Youth also discussed several strategies for adapting to barriers and enhancing their participation during winter, including: (1) wheelchair maintenance; (2) awareness of surroundings; (3) practice using mobility devices and planning; and (4) keeping busy and active. Conclusions: Youth who use a mobility device are vulnerable to health and safety risks and isolation during the winter, but they also display signs of resilience. Implications for RehabilitationClinicians should ensure that youth who are new to using their mobility device are properly trained in how to use it.Service providers should offer a winter survival guide to youth who use a mobility device.Clinicians should be taught to recognize signs of loneliness, isolation and depression, and provide a list of local resources and activities during the winter.Rehabilitation engineers should focus their efforts on adapting mobility devices to enhance the safety of youth.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations51
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207