Barriers and Facilitators to Family-centred Paediatric Physiotherapy Practice in the Home setting: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Family-centred paediatric physiotherapy practice is a new and emerging concept in India. This study aimed to understand paediatric physiotherapists’ perceptions of the barriers and facilitators to such practice in home settings in Salem city in southern India.Methods: A phenomenological research design was employed in this study. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 5 paediatric physiotherapists who offer treatment in the home setting. Open coding analysis revealed themes that were broadly categorised into barriers and facilitators to family-centred paediatric physiotherapy practice in these settings.Results: Physiotherapists identified several barriers such as educational status, frustrated family members, protective family members, cultural beliefs and external influences. Active participation of family members was perceived as a facilitator to family-centred practice.Limitations: This pilot study has a number of limitations. As the sample size was small and the participants were selected from a small city, the results may not be generalised to larger areas of India. Also, since the interviews were conducted in English, which was not the physiotherapists’ first language, some nuances of their perceptions may not have been reflected.Implications: The study suggests that paediatric physiotherapists need to have better understanding of parental attitudes, and family culture and beliefs, in order to improve the physiotherapist-family relationship and maximise the outcome for children.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".