Working with immigrant families raising a child with a disability: challenges and recommendations for healthcare and community service providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although providing culturally sensitive care is an important element of family-centered rehabilitation very is little known about providers' experiences working with immigrant families in pediatric settings. The purpose of this study is to develop a better understanding of the experiences of service providers working with immigrant families raising a child with a physical disability. METHOD: We draw on a qualitative approach involving in-depth interviews and focus groups with healthcare and community service providers (n = 13) in two multi-cultural Canadian cities. RESULTS: The findings indicate that healthcare and community service providers encounter several challenges in providing care to immigrant families raising a child with a disability. Such challenges include the following: (1) lack of training in providing culturally sensitive care; (2) language and communication issues; (3) discrepancies in conceptualizations of disability between healthcare providers and immigrant parents; (4) building rapport; and (5) helping parents to advocate for themselves and their children. Service providers also have several recommendations for improving services to better meet the needs of immigrant families. CONCLUSION: Clinicians should be cognizant of how culture influences the care they provide to clients. More training opportunities are needed for enhancing culturally sensitive care. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: • Pediatric rehabilitation providers working with immigrant families raising a child with a disability should engage in training and education around culturally sensitive care to better meet the needs of these clients. • More time is needed when working with immigrant families to build trust and rapport. • Clinicians need to be sensitive around gender issues and try to involve both parents in the decision making around the care for their child. • Healthcare providers should help clients to become more aware of the resources available to them in the hospital and in the community.
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 | 0.019 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".