Family impact of childhood neurodevelopmental disability: considering adaptive and maladaptive behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to identify functional predictors of perceived impact of childhood disability among families of children with neurodevelopmental disorders and disabilities. We first examined the relationship between sub-domains of adaptive and problematic behaviour and perceived family impact. Second, we examined whether the same sub-domains would emerge as significant after controlling for the impact of child diagnosis, including autism spectrum disorder, cerebral palsy and intellectual disability. METHOD: Caregivers of 216 children and adolescents (M = 8.17 years) with neurodevelopmental disorder and disability completed measures of children's practical, conceptual and social skills (i.e. adaptive behaviour), behaviour problems and positive and negative family impact. RESULTS: Indices of child adaptive and problematic behaviour were only significantly associated with perceived negative family impact. Children's practical and social skills, as well as emotional symptoms, emerged as significant predictors of perceived negative family impact, with emotional symptoms accounting for greatest variance. Including diagnosis in our statistical models did not explain additional variance above and beyond these particular sub-domains of child functioning. CONCLUSIONS: The study findings suggest that it is not children's most impaired domains of functioning that are perceived as significantly impactful by the family. The findings highlight the importance of devoting consideration to the ways in which the functional limitations experienced by children with chronic developmental health conditions similarly impact family life and well-being, regardless of disorder designation.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".