“If I Knew Then What I Know Now”: Parents’ Reflections on Raising a Child with Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we investigated experiences of parents of children with cerebral palsy (CP) to identify areas in which health care providers and educators could improve practice. A second objective was to create educational material for parents of young children newly diagnosed with CP. A purposive sample of nine parents, who previously participated in the Adolescent Study of Quality of Life, Mobility, and Exercise, was recruited through phone. During an interview, parents reflected on the experience of raising a child with CP from birth to young adulthood. These interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-informed model and analyzed to identify major themes. Parents elaborated upon what was helpful and what could be changed to improve their children's and families' experiences through supports, advocacy, and education at different levels. The results informed the development of tips for parents and children with CP to enhance their families' experiences and interactions with health care providers, educators, and others.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".