Successful Participation: The Lived Experience among Children with Disabilities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with disabilities are at risk for limited daily occupational participation. This paper presents a phenomenological study describing the meaning of participation in activities outside of school to children with physical and neurological disabilities and their parents. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight children and their parents. RESULTS: Nine themes, organized under three categories, describe what successful participation means, and the personal and environmental supports and barriers to participation. Successful participation is defined in terms of being with others and being able to perform tasks independently. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that children with physical and neurological disabilities enjoy the same activities as those children without these disabilities. Activities allowing children to experience enjoyment have the best chance of ensuring children's participation. The role of the parent in providing opportunities for participation, and the importance of environmental and personal resources are particularly important. Finally, implications for occupational therapy and research are discussed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 it