Social isolation and exclusion: the parents' experience of caring for children with rare neurodevelopmental disorders
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
Purpose: The experiences of parents caring for the complex care needs of children with rare neurodevelopmental disorders are not well understood. Parents struggle to meet their children’s medical, behavioural, and social needs within and across health, social, and family systems. The purpose of this study was to explore the parents’ experience of caring for medical and social care needs for children with rare neurodevelopmental disorders.Methods: Hermeneutic phenomenology was used for the data analysis. Fifteen parents participated in semi-structured interviews.Results: Interpretive analysis revealed four insights: (a) difference in children’s behaviours and disease manifestations led to misunderstanding and vulnerability within social domains, (b) social taboo and stigma were experienced with rarity, (c) fragmented disconnected care from health and social systems impacted families, and (d) incomprehension from friends and family occurs when managing daily care.Conclusion: New interpretations and increased understanding of parents’ experiences are required in supporting parents caring for children with complex needs. Understanding parents’ experiences could reduce social isolation and exclusion, and mitigate appropriate and supportive practices and services within and across medical, social, and family 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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