A multidimensional model of optimal participation of children with physical disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To present a conceptual model of optimal participation in recreational and leisure activities for children with physical disabilities. METHODS: The conceptualization of the model was based on review of contemporary theories and frameworks, empirical research and the authors' practice knowledge. A case scenario is used to illustrate application to practice. RESULTS: The model proposes that optimal participation in recreational and leisure activities involves the dynamic interaction of multiple dimensions and determinants of participation. The three dimensions of participation are physical, social and self-engagement. Determinants of participation encompass attributes of the child, family and environment. Experiences of optimal participation are hypothesized to result in long-term benefits including better quality of life, a healthier lifestyle and emotional and psychosocial well-being. CONCLUSION: Consideration of relevant child, family and environment determinants of dimensions of optimal participation should assist children, families and health care professionals to identify meaningful goals and outcomes and guide the selection and implementation of innovative therapy approaches and methods of service delivery. Implications for Rehabilitation Optimal participation is proposed to involve the dynamic interaction of physical, social and self-engagement and attributes of the child, family and environment. The model emphasizes the importance of self-perceptions and participation experiences of children with physical disabilities. Optimal participation may have a positive influence on quality of life, a healthy lifestyle and emotional and psychosocial well-being. Knowledge of child, family, and environment determinants of physical, social and self-engagement should assist children, families and professionals in identifying meaningful goals and guiding innovative therapy approaches.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".