MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751466328 · doi:10.3390/ijerph14091005

Enhancing Youth Participation Using the PREP Intervention: Parents’ Perspectives

2017· article· en· W2751466328 on OpenAlexafffund
Dana Anaby, Coralie Mercerat, Stéphanie Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Thematic analysisCoachingPsychologyAutonomyQualitative researchPsychotherapistPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pathways and Resources for Engagement and Participation (PREP), an innovative intervention aimed at modifying the environment and coaching youth/parents, was found to be effective in improving youth participation in chosen community activities. In order to complement existing quantitative evidence, this study examined parents' perspectives on the PREP approach. Twelve parents of youth with physical disabilities (12 to 18 years old) who received the PREP approach participated in individual semi-structured interviews following the 12-week intervention delivered by an occupational therapist. Thematic analysis revealed three inter-linked themes, the first of which was informative, describing the "nature of intervention", and led to two reflective themes: "multi-faceted effects of care" and "process of care". Parents highlighted the effect of the PREP intervention in a broad sense, extending beyond the accomplishment of the selected activities. This involved improvements on the physical, emotional, and social levels as well as in autonomy. Parents also discussed how their own needs were acknowledged through the intervention and recognized the unique role of the occupational therapist in supporting this process. The findings provide additional information about the usefulness of the PREP approach and describe the various benefits generated by a single intervention. Such knowledge can expand the therapeutic options for positive, health-promoting participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.167
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207