Equipment and modifications that enabled infant child-care by a mother with C8 tetraplegia: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the past, rehabilitative effort after spinal cord injury has focused on maximizing physical functioning related to activities of daily living and self-care, with less emphasis on issues such as care-giving. The number of women becoming pregnant and rearing children after spinal cord injury has increased in recent years, but descriptions of equipment and modifications used in child-care are scarce. Equipment and techniques that enable physical independence in providing infant-care by persons with low-level tetraplegia has not previously been described. METHODS: This case report describes the modified equipment and physical strategies used by a mother with C8 tetraplegia to physically care for her young infants. Relevant issues of physical function were identified, potential sources for equipment and techniques were reviewed, and then the equipment and technique solutions were formulated. RESULTS: Attachment arms and brackets were made so that a lightweight stroller could be attached directly to the mother's manual wheelchair, a crib was modified with sliding Lexan doors so that it could be accessed at wheelchair level, and a table with sides was designed and built to act as a play surface where the mother could independently place an infant. All other pieces of baby-care equipment were commercially available and the mother developed strategies for their use without modification. CONCLUSION: With the exception of bathing, using the tools and techniques described, this mother was able to achieve physical independence in providing her children's infant care.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".