Family support and family and child-related outcomes among families impacted by disability in low- and middle-income countries: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a growing interest in understanding the relationship between family support and family or child-related outcomes in high-income countries. However, this has received little attention in low- and middle-income countries. The purpose of this review was to explore the relationship between family support and family and child-related outcomes among families affected by disability in low- and middle-income countries. We conducted a scoping review of five databases using search terms related to 'family', 'support', 'child', and 'disability'. A total of 13 articles met the inclusion criteria. Families of children with disabilities received most of their support from informal sources (e.g. immediate family members, friends, and parents support groups). Parental stress was most often evaluated as the family outcome and was negatively linked to emotional support and childcare assistance from immediate family members. Movement and mobility therapy offered by rehabilitation professionals was found to improve children's walking patterns. Positive attitudes from community members were key facilitators to participation of children with disabilities in social activities. The review calls for urgent attention to research in low- and middle-income countries, particularly the extent of support families are receiving from government-led support systems.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".