Exploring Parents' Perceptions and How Physiotherapy Supports Transition from Rehabilitation to School for Youth with an ABI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To explore parents' perceptions of their youth's transition from rehabilitation to school following an Acquired Brain Injury (ABI) and how physiotherapy influenced the youth's participation and physical function during the transition. METHODS: The study utilized phenomenological qualitative methodology using semi-structured interviews with 11 parents of youth 10 to 18 years of age recruited from one pediatric rehabilitation hospital in Ontario. Each interview was audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Parents valued physiotherapy and highlighted potential areas of improved service delivery to promote participation in an active lifestyle during this transition. In addition to being parents, they had to assume new roles and responsibilities in order to motivate their youth to continue with therapy and physical activity and had to facilitate their participation in school, recreational and social activities. CONCLUSION: For youth following an ABI, the transition back to school is complex and strategies should be supportive and responsive. Implications for physiotherapists include improved collaboration with community partners to motivate youth and promote physical activity; engage youth with their peers early in the rehabilitation process; and ongoing support for parents.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".