Positive Distraction in Pediatric Healthcare Waiting Spaces: Sharing Play Not Germs through Inclusive, Hands-Free Interactive Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the value of shared opportunities for positive distraction in pediatric healthcare environments.Methods: Self-selected activities of 271 young people (5–19 years) with diverse neurodevelopmental conditions were observed in an ambulatory pediatric rehabilitation clinic. Shared opportunities included hands-free media (nature video or interactive media) and an aquarium. Anxiety was self-reported on the State Trait Anxiety Scale upon arrival and after 10 minutes in the waiting space.Results: Young people engaged more with shared opportunities for distraction (n = 170/271) than personal items brought from home (n = 119/271), p = 0.02. Personal electronic devices were used by 67 young people, but did not positively impact anxiety. Interactive media and the aquarium significantly reduced anxiety (p < 0.04) while the nature video appeared to increase anxiety (p = 0.036). Age influenced activity preference and anxiety. Shared, hands-free interactive media engaged individuals of diverse age and mobility.Conclusion: Shared opportunities for positive distraction in healthcare facilities are valuable, particularly hands-free interactive media.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".