Technological Accessibility for People with an Intellectual Disability: A model for Organizational Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a few years, technology has created an effective revolution in the field of intervention among people with intellectual disabilities. The use of such technology contributes to social inclusion and participation of the people in their community. Unfortunately, several obstacles are encountered by social services during the implementation of technologies among people with intellectual disabilities. A research with new ideas and new results was conducted with 11 managers in the field of social services to identify their needs and expectations as well as the difficulties they encounter in deploying technology during intervention. This research documents the mechanisms for social services and more specifically the elements that promotes an optimal access to technology. Results have allowed the creation of a management model supporting the application of technology in the field of social services which is called the Multidimensional Model of Organization's Support. The model is based on three fundamental and interrelated dimensions (management, clinical and technical) and 3 parameters (the user profile of a technological innovation, the type of technology and the life cycle of technologies). Preliminary results confirm the importance of providing different forms of support to clinicians in each dimension according to the identified parameters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".