Looking back to move forward: Reflections and lessons learned about transitions to adulthood for youth with disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transition to adulthood is a significant development process experienced by all youth. Since the mid 1990s, researchers at the CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research have been studying this process to assist transitioning youth with disabilities and their families. The objective of this narrative review is to reflect on the work conducted by CanChild researchers, in collaboration with stakeholders, about transitions to adulthood for youth and young adults with disabilities since the publication of the best practice guidelines in 2009. METHODS: A narrative review was undertaken through a reflective approach to critically review and summarize all the transition studies completed at CanChild since 2009. The following data were systematically extracted from articles and research reports: study (authors and year of publication), purpose, methods, sample, and lessons learned. RESULTS: Five studies were identified. An analysis of the findings revealed five key themes that represented lessons learned since the publication of the Ontario-based best practice guidelines: promoting a noncategorical and lifecourse approach to care; active collaboration among stakeholders involved in transition; capacity building through peer mentorship; greater understanding of the significance of opportunities and experiences; as well as the significance of information, education, and research. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first review to provide perspective on trends in transition research since the publication of the best practice guidelines in 2009. It is hoped that this reflection will assist in the ongoing work of researchers, service providers, policy makers, communities, and families in the area of adult transitions for youth with disabilities.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".