Out‐of‐school time activity participation profiles of children with physical disabilities: a cluster analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine out-of-school activity participation profiles of school-aged children with physical disabilities. METHODS: Activity participation profiles were determined by cluster analysing 427 children's responses on multiple dimensions of participation (intensity, location, companionship, enjoyment, preference) in five activity types (recreational, active physical, social, skill-based, self-improvement). Socio-demographic, child, parent, family and environmental predictors of group membership were determined, along with child functioning, socio-demographic, self-concept and social support variables significantly associated with group membership. RESULTS: The cluster analysis revealed four groups, labelled Social Participators (a highly social and neighbourhood-focused group), Broad Participators (a group of high participators who enjoy participation), Low Participators (a group with low enjoyment and weak preferences) and Recreational Participators (a group of younger children who participate in recreational activities with family members). The groups showed meaningful differences across a range of socio-demographic, child, parent, family and environmental variables. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support an affective and contextual view of participation, indicating the importance of motivational theory and a person-environment approach in understanding the complexity of children's out-of-school activity participation.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".