A Snapshot of Quality Participation in Physical Activity for Individuals With Developmental Disabilities: a Photo Elicitation Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Not only do adults with disabilities have a right to participate, they have the right to full participation. Enabling full participation means having access to and engaging in a range of opportunities that are satisfying and enjoyable, and generate personally valued outcomes. Currently, it is unclear how community-based physical activity programs provide individuals with developmental disabilities the opportunity to participate regardless of their abilities. Additionally, there is a need to understand how community-based physical activity programs promote full participation through increasing quality experiences. According to Martin Ginis and colleagues (2017) a quality experience includes one or more of the following elements: autonomy, belongingness, challenge, engagement, meaning and mastery. The purpose of this study was to explore the subjective experience of participation to understand how community- based physical activity programs for adults with developmental disabilities foster full participation. Eleven adults with developmental disabilities were given a disposable camera to take photos of their participation experience in a community-based physical activity program. Participants discussed their photos in a semi-structured interview; interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. Three facilitators to physical activity engagement associated with community-based physical activity program emerged: the opportunity to participate regardless of ability, partnerships with community organizations and familial/caregiver support. These three strategies helped individuals with developmental disabilities overcome barriers to physical activity, allowing access to participation experiences. In relation to quality experiences, all six elements of a quality experience as identified by Martin Ginis and colleagues (2017) emerged. Three factors that foster quality elements were discussed: positive social relationships, the role of a volunteer and the adaptability of the program. Finally, two outcomes of quality experiences were discussed by participants: pride and fun. This study is the first to investigate the subjective experience of community-based physical activity program participation for individuals with developmental disabilities through a quality participation lens. Results highlight factors within a community-based physical activity program that are important for providing access to participation experiences and fostering quality elements among individuals with developmental disabilities.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it