Perspectives of Adolescents and Young Adults with Cerebral Palsy on the Ethical and Social Challenges Encountered in Healthcare Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Healthcare is a context where individuals with disability confront important ethical and social challenges. Adolescents and young adults with cerebral palsy (CP) seem to face additional challenges but we have little insight into their perspectives. This qualitative study aimed to identify and better understand such challenges. We interviewed 14 participants with CP aged 18 to 25. Participants described a range of challenges experienced when using health services, including: lack of long-term follow-up, shortcomings in physical access to infrastructures, and situations of injustice. Challenges specific to medical consultations were reported (e.g., rude attitudes, belittlement, inadequate communication, lack of consideration). We discuss and explain further that: (1) the ethical principle of respect for persons needs to be concretely specified to improve current practices; (2) respect for autonomy calls for further direct empowerment of individuals with CP and, (3) gaps in dedicated healthcare resources for CP and the long-term needs associated should be addressed.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".