Exploring the ICF-CY as a framework to inform transition programs from pediatric to adult healthcare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the utility of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Children and Youth Version (ICF-CY) for informing transition-related programs for youth with chronic conditions moving into adult healthcare settings, using an exemplar spina bifida program. METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 53 participants (9 youth and 11 parents who participated in a spina bifida transition program, 12 young adults who did not, 12 clinicians, and 9 key informants involved in development/implementation). Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed, and then further coded using ICF-CY domain codes. RESULTS: ICF-CY domains captured many key areas regarding individuals" transitions to adult care and adult functioning, but did not fully capture concepts of transition program experience, independence, and parents" role. CONCLUSIONS: The ICF-CY framework captures some experiences of transitions to adult care, but should be considered in conjunction with other models that address issues outside of the domains covered by the ICF-CY.
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 | 0.030 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".