Poster 429 What is Effect of Family Functioning on Transition to Independent Living in Adult Spina Bifida?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
D. Berbrayer, No Disclosures. To investigate the role of family functioning in transition to independence in adult (>18 years) spina bifida. Study conducted using self-administered survey distributed to 30 adults. The survey was composed of six sections. First section: demographics. Second section: “Self-Report Family Inventory.” Family functioning scored in five domains: Health/Competence, Cohesion, Conflict, Leadership, and Expressiveness. Two qualitative questions asked in third section survey. First question: “What advice would you give to parents with spina bifida about helping their son/daughter become more independent as he/ she grows older?”. Second question: “What advice would you give to an adolescent with spina bifida about becoming more independent as he/ she grows older?”. Fourth section: “Satisfaction With Living Environment” questionnaire. Fifth section: “Experience of Home” questionnaire, Sixth section: “Barthel Questionnaire.” University Teaching Hospital. 30 participants 18 independent, 12 dependent; 6 males, 24 females. Barthel score range: 8-20. Survey: 6 sections: demographics, self-report family inventory, 2 qualitative questions, satisfaction with living environment questionnaire, experience of home questionnaire, Barthel questionnaire. Questionnaire scored in each of five domains separately. Overall sum of 8 scores was calculated. Six values compared against status of “living independently” or “not living independently” in each participant. For each questionnaire a mean score and standard deviation was calculated for participants in the “living independently” and “not living independently” categories. No statistically significant correlation between scores of any of questionnaires and whether or not the participant lived independently. Post-hoc analysis demonstrated a statistically significant correlation between greater age of participants and living independently. Secondary outcome from qualitative questions suggested many adults with spina bifida feel parents had been overprotective. Family counseling unlikely to incite an adult with spina bifida to transition to independence. Participants who continue not to live independently are not necessarily discontented with their circumstances .The average age not living independently was 24.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".