A transactional framework for pediatric rehabilitation: shifting the focus to situated contexts, transactional processes, and adaptive developmental outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A paradigm shift is taking place in pediatric rehabilitation research, practice, and policy - a shift towards the real-life contexts of clients rather than requiring clients to navigate the world of pediatric rehabilitation. This article proposes a conceptual framework to bring about a broader awareness of clients' lives and transactional processes of change over the life course. METHOD: The framework draws attention to transactional processes by which individuals, situated in life contexts, change and adapt over the life course and, in turn, influence their contextual settings and broader environments. This framework is based on (a) basic tenets derived from foundational theories taking a life course perspective to change, and (b) transactional processes identified from relevant pediatric rehabilitation models that bring these foundational theories into the pediatric rehabilitation sphere. RESULTS: The framework identifies three types of transactional processes relevant to pediatric rehabilitation: facilitative, resiliency, and socialization processes. These processes describe how contexts and people mutually influence each other via opportunities and situated experiences, thus facilitating capacity, adaptation to adversity, and socialization to new roles and life transitions. CONCLUSIONS: The utility of the framework is considered for research, practice, service organizations, and policy. Implications for Rehabilitation The framework supports practitioners going beyond person and environment as separate entities, to provide services to the "situated person" in real-life contexts The framework shifts the focus from "body structures/functions" and "person in activity" to "person in changing and challenging life contexts" Working from a transactional perspective, practitioner-client conversations will change; practitioners will view client situations through a lens of opportunities and experiences, assess client experiences in real-life contexts, and strive to create context-based therapy opportunities The framework suggests the benefit of greater focus on resiliency processes to support client self-efficacy, self-determination, and autonomy, and socialization processes to enhance ability to enact new life roles at times of transition.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".