MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142277567 · doi:10.5014/ajot.57.2.186

Home Is Where Their Wheels Are: Experiences of Women Wheelchair Users

2003· article· en· W2142277567 on OpenAlexaff
Denise Reid, Jan Angus, Pat McKeever, Karen‐Lee Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairStairsAutonomyMeaning (existential)Space (punctuation)PsychologyAging in placeQualitative researchSample (material)Social psychologyApplied psychologySociologyGerontologyMedicineEngineeringComputer sciencePolitical sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the experiences of mothers who are wheelchair users in their roles of homemaking and parenting. A qualitative study using in-depth, focused interviews was conducted with a purposeful sample of 11 women with various physical disabilities. Three major themes were uncovered in the data: (a) lived space restricting personal autonomy, (b) advocacy strategies to secure appropriate housing, and (c) my wheelchair, my liberator, my sense of comfort. Findings from this study showed that women did not have the freedom or economic resources to seek out new living arrangements or make modifications to existing environments. Lack of space, stairs, difficult-to-reach spaces, poor transportation, and limited community access were barriers that women experienced. The study also points to the importance of recognizing that the women used many strategies to regain control over aspects of their environment to enable greater autonomy and participation for themselves. Sensitivity to the meaning of home and the relationship between the body and the environmental features that surround it may be a significant contribution of the clinician as he or she seeks to assist women wheelchair users.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations39
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207