The effect of the environment on participation of children and youth with disabilities: a scoping review
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
OBJECTIVE: The study’s purpose was to identify and synthesize research evidence regarding the effect of the environment on community participation of children with disabilities. METHODS: A scoping review of peer-reviewed studies published from 1990 to 2011 was performed. Two independent reviewers selected studies based on a systematic procedure. Inclusion criteria for studies were: participants with a disability, aged 5–21 years, whose environment was examined in relation to participation in out-of-school activities. Data were organized and synthesized based on environmental domains within the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF): Natural Environment/Products and Technology; Support and Relationships; Attitudes; and Services, Systems and Policies. RESULTS: Searching identified 1232 articles and 31 met the inclusion criteria. Each domain of the environment within the ICF influenced participation as a facilitator and/or barrier. The most common facilitators involved social support of family and friends and geographic location. The most common barriers included attitudes, physical environment, transportation, policies and the lack of support from staff and service providers. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge derived from this review can assist practitioners in addressing the specific environmental domains that influence children's participation. Such awareness can also foster new research questions and assist policy makers in identifying the factors influencing participation. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: All domains of the environment, suggested by the ICF, have an influence on children’s participation.Evidence regarding the effect of the environment on participation is focused primarily on children with physical disabilities; more studies are needed involving various health conditions and age groups. Practitioners and decision-makers can focus attention on specific aspects of the environment, e.g. attitudinal challenges and social support, in order to foster inclusion and participation-based 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it