Developing Culturally Responsive Approaches With Southeast Asian American Families Experiencing Developmental Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Southeast Asian American families are underrepresented among recipients of special education and social services for people with developmental disabilities. Our aims were to use a community-based participatory research approach to examine Hmong and Mien families' perceptions of developmental disabilities and understand barriers to and facilitators of service provision among families experiencing developmental disabilities. We describe here a case study of a successful attempt to engage marginalized and underserved communities to understand their needs to improve access and services for persons with developmental disabilities. METHODS: We conducted 2 focus groups with 11 key informants and 1 focus group with 10 family members of persons with developmental disabilities, as well as in-depth interviews with 3 shamans. Using a thematic analysis approach, we coded notes and transcripts to assess community members' understanding of developmental disabilities, experiences negotiating educational and health care systems, and barriers to high-quality care. RESULTS: A predominant theme was the perception that reliance on governmental support services is not appropriate. Common barriers identified included lack of accurate information, language difficulties, lack of trust, and limited outreach. These perceptions and barriers, combined with limited access to services, interfere with community acceptance and use of available support services. Despite these barriers, participants indicated that with education, outreach, and culturally responsive support, families would likely accept services. CONCLUSIONS: Community-based participatory methods are effective for eliciting root causes of health inequities in marginalized communities. Outreach to community-based organizations and an inclusive research practice identified social and cultural reasons for low service uptake and provided a pathway for the community to improve services for persons with developmental disabilities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".