It’s Not Just Me. Parents’ Perceptions of a Multi-Disciplinary Therapy Group for Infants with Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To explore parent perceptions of Baby Club, a therapeutic program involving physiotherapy, occupational therapy, and speech and language therapy for infants with physical disabilities under 2 years and to better understand how the group addresses child and family needs. Methods: A qualitative descriptive design using semi-structured interviews and a brief demographics questionnaire. Eight parents who attended a Baby Club program between 2017 and 2018 were recruited from ErinoakKids Centre for Treatment and Development. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. A content analysis approach was used with an inductive process to generate a coding scheme. Investigators developed overarching themes. Results: Three themes representing parents’ perceptions of Baby Club were identified: (1) Learning Together through Play and Fun; (2) I’m Not the Only One – Sharing and Support; (3) The Value of Therapist Time and Expertise. Conclusions: Baby Club provides parents and infants with opportunities to learn new skills through play, providing enriching social experiences and networking in a supportive therapeutic group environment.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".