Bibliographic record
Abstract
The caregiver family plays an integral role in promoting the overall functioning of the family unit. The six caregiver families in this study were nuclear families in Manitoba who are of hearing status and are raising a child who has special needs in communication. Caregivers shared their parenting experiences as they learned about deafness, took on new roles to meet the needs of their children, and carried out work to bridge the gaps between the deaf child and social systems, such as the school, recreational, and medical systems. The findings from this qualitative study share how caregiver families moved from knowing nothing about deafness to acquiring knowledge and specialized skills on deafness, and deaf-blindness, from their child’s birth to school entry. Several families described their struggles in obtaining resources for their deaf children. Two families relocated to a city so their child could attend a school for the deaf, who teaches academic material using the American Sign Language (ASL). Relocation experiences were described as a grieving process and required multiple adjustments in their life. The families undertook extensive work to establish a shared language in their home so the child could access family life. Once language was established in the home, caregivers further created social linkages between their child and social institutions outside the home. Families also provided recommendations on how hearing people could support the child and his or her family, and offered advice to caregivers and anyone else new to deafness with their perspectives on how others may address typical barriers that they may encounter along the way. This study refers to the Ecological perspective and Empowerment theory and is discussed in the literature review describing the caregiver roles, work and approach to facilitate the integrative linkages between their home, extended family, friends, school, medical professionals, and hearing public.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".