Transitioning to Adulthood in Sweden: Comparing the Priorities of Immigrant Youths with Disabilities and Caregivers, from Middle-Eastern Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is limited knowledge about perceived challenges during the transition to adulthood among immigrant youths who are originally from Arabic-speaking countries but now residing in Sweden. Aim: The aim of this study was to describe self-identified problems encountered by immigrant youths with disabilities from Middle Eastern countries who were living in Sweden during their transition to adulthood and to compare these descriptions to the problems identified by their caregivers. Methods: Seventeen semi-structured interviews using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure were conducted with 17 immigrant youths with intellectual disabilities aged 13-24 years and 16 caregivers, originally from Middle Eastern countries. The participants’ prioritized problems were categorized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health-Children & Youth Version, focusing on Activity and Participation. Results: A difference in priorities during transition was found when comparing the youths’ and the caregivers’ views. Most of the youths’ priorities were identified in the chapter “Major Life Area” about basic economic transactions and seeking employment, whilst the caregivers thought their youths’ prioritized “self-care”. Conclusion and implications for practice: Planning the best transition for immigrant youths with disabilities involves enabling them to identify their own preferences and needs while collaborating with caregivers and taking into consideration the cultural norms and traditions of collective caregiving.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".