Adolescent group empowerment: group‐centred occupations to empower adolescents with disabilities in the urban slums of North India
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
This study aimed to understand how adolescents with disabilities can assume greater control over their rehabilitation and participation within a community-based rehabilitation programme in the urban slums of North India. A critical ethnographical approach using multiple qualitative and participatory data collection methods was adopted. Fieldwork was conducted from January to May 2005 and October 2006 to March 2007 with 21 adolescents with and 11 adolescents without disabilities (aged 12 to 18 years), and 10 community-based rehabilitation staff members. A conceptual framework called the 'Adolescent Group Empowerment Pyramid' was developed. Four themes informed the framework: group participation, group demonstration, group recognition and the socio-cultural environment's interaction with disability. Group empowerment, achieved through group-centred occupations, encourages adolescents to work together to address their rehabilitation challenges and agendas. Three external support factors and 10 areas for nurturing the group empowerment process also emerged. A limitation of this study is the lack of data on how the familial and local political and economic environment impact adolescents' ability to make decisions about their rehabilitation. Further research might explore group occupations and occupational recognition, and what this means for social change and the personal and collective growth of adolescents in underserviced communities.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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