MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceived environmental restrictions for the participation of children with mild developmental disabilities

2011· article· en· W2133215197 on OpenAlexaff
Limor Rosenberg, Navah Z. Ratzon, Tal Jarus, Orit Bart

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: In light of the International Classification of Functioning, and Health (ICF) model, to assess whether parents of children with mild developmental disabilities perceived various environmental factors as barriers to their child's participation, and whether these factors have a unique contribution to the total explained variance of participation, beyond personal factors. METHODS: Seventy-nine kindergarten children (mean age 5.20 ± 0.52 years old) with mild developmental disabilities and their parents participated in the study. Three questionnaires measuring the child's participation, performance skills and environmental factors were completed by the parents. RESULTS: Parents perceived environmental factors as slightly restricting to their child's participation. Associations were found between home and education factors and the dimensions of child participation - independence, enjoyment and parental satisfaction. Although parents perceived human environmental factors as more restricting than physical factors at home, regression analysis revealed that the latter was found to affect the child participation dimension of independence beyond the contribution of personal factors. INTERPRETATION: These findings are the first, to our knowledge, to support the contribution of environmental factors to the participation of young children with mild developmental disabilities. The results show that environmental factors have significant slight contribution to child's independence in participation beyond other predictors (i.e. personal factors). Therefore, it is recommended to include environmental restrictions measurement in the child evaluation process to facilitate effective intervention programs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations42
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207