MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099022314 · doi:10.1080/02739610903237352

Predictors of Change Over Time in the Activity Participation of Children and Youth With Physical Disabilities

2009· article· en· W2099022314 on OpenAlexaff
Gillian King, Janette McDougall, David J. DeWit, Theresa Petrenchik, Patricia A. Hurley, Mary Law

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren s Health Care · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInclusion and Disability in Education and Sport
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical CentreThames Valley Children's CentreCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsRecreationPhysical activityLatent growth modelingPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyLeisure timeIntervention (counseling)DemographyMedicineGerontologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about predictors of change over time in the intensity of the leisure and recreational activity participation of children with physical disabilities. This study reports data from 402 children/youth with physical disabilities (216 boys and 186 girls), ages 6 to 15, collected on three occasions over a 3-year period. Latent growth curve modeling was used to determine the significant child, family, and community predictors of change in the intensity of their participation in five types of activities (recreational, active physical, social, skill-based, and self-improvement). Differences in predictors were examined for boys versus girls, and older versus younger children. Significant predictors of change were found only for recreational and active physical activities. The findings indicate that factors associated with change in participation intensity are dependent on the type of activity, and vary as a function of children's sex and age. Implications for research and service delivery are discussed, including the importance of a contextualized, holistic, and developmental approach to intervention.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.329 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations89
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren s Health CareSame topicInclusion and Disability in Education and SportFrench-language works237,207