Family‐oriented services in pediatric rehabilitation: a scoping review and framework to promote parent and family wellness
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Family-oriented services are not as common as one would expect, given the widespread endorsement of family-centred care, the role of parents in supporting optimal child outcomes, and legislation and literature indicating that parent outcomes are important in their own right. There are no published service delivery frameworks describing the scope of services that could be delivered to promote parent and family wellness. A scoping review was conducted to identify types of family-oriented services for parents of children with physical disabilities and/or intellectual impairments. This information was then synthesized into a conceptual framework of services to inform service selection and design. A scoping review of the recent literature was performed to capture descriptions of services targeting parents/families of children with physical disabilities and/or intellectual impairments, published in a six-year period (2009 to 2014). Six databases were searched and 557 retrieved articles were screened using inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thirty six relevant articles were identified. Based on descriptions of services in these articles, along with seminal articles describing the nature of desirable services, we propose a needs-based and capacity-enhancing framework outlining a continuum of family-oriented services for parents of children with disabilities. The framework includes six types of services to meet parent/family needs, organized as a continuum from fundamental information/education services, to those supporting parents to deliver services to meet their child's needs, to a variety of services addressing parents' own needs (support groups, psychosocial services and service coordination). The framework provides pediatric rehabilitation service organizations with a way to consider different possible family-oriented services. Implications include the particular importance of providing information resources, support groups and psychosocial services to meet parents' needs, enhance capacity and promote family wellness. There is also an opportunity to provide composite parent-child services to address the needs of both parents and children.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it