MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Strategies for improving disability awareness and social inclusion of children and young people with cerebral palsy

2011· article· en· W2150132939 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistère de l’Éducation, Gouvernement de l’Ontario
KeywordsCerebral palsyInclusion (mineral)PsychologyContext (archaeology)Developmental psychologyFocus groupTypically developingClinical psychologyPsychiatryAutismSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children and youth with disabilities are at a higher risk of being socially excluded or bullied while at school compared with their typically developing peers. This study explored disabled children's suggestions for improving social inclusion. METHODS: Fifteen children with cerebral palsy were interviewed or took part in a group discussion about social inclusion and bullying. All interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. RESULTS: The children and youth described several strategies to help improve social inclusion at school including: (1) disclosure of condition and creating awareness of disability; (2) awareness of bullying; (3) developing a peer support network and building self-confidence; and (4) suggestions on what teachers can do. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that children's suggestions be considered within the classroom context to enhance the social inclusion and participation of children with disabilities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.250 · 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