MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3021290253 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2020.1754926

Developing a Canadian framework for social determinants of health and well-being among children with neurodisabilities and their families: an ecosocial perspective

2020· review· en· W3021290253 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ângela Marques Filipe, Aline Bogossian, Rosslynn Zulla, David Nicholas, Lucyna Lach

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial determinants of healthConceptual frameworkPsychologyContext (archaeology)Public healthSociologyMedicineSocial scienceNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Social Determinants of Health is a conceptual framework typically used to understand patterns of health and ill-health at the population level. Its applicability to children and youth who already have a health condition, in this case, a neurodisability, is not well understood, particularly when the “health” component of that framework is extended to include more pluralistic notions of well-being. The purpose of this study was to address this challenge and to develop an ecosocial framework that is conceptually integrative and meaningful to children and youth with neurodisabilities and their families.Methods Drawing on a critical literature review, a conceptual analysis approach, and a secondary analysis of a compendium of 36 social determinants of health models, we critically analysed how these models map onto the context of childhood neurodisability and identified key conceptual and empirical challenges. The emerging framework was further validated through iterative stakeholder consultation with parents, self-advocates, researchers, practitioners, community leaders, and decision-makers.Results The review and consultation process generated The Canadian Framework for Social Determinants of Health and Well-being among Children with Neurodisabilities and their Families. This new framework consists of two hemispheres encompassing explanatory (or observational) and action-oriented (or transformational) components relating to social determinants of health and well-being and living a daily life of quality in childhood neurodisability.Conclusion The proposed framework provides a roadmap for practitioners, policy-makers, and researchers as well as activists, families, and communities, to reflect on both social determinants and social change processes that shape the health, well-being, and everyday lives of children and youth with neurodisabilities and their families.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONSocial Determinants of Health provides a conceptual framework for understanding the social causes and consequences of health and ill-health at the population level.In childhood neurodisability, however, it is important to consider pluralistic notions of “well-being” and living a daily “life of quality” that may relate, but are not limited, to health.The Canadian Framework for Social Determinants of Health and Well-being among Children with Neurodisabilities and their Families comprises an explanatory hemisphere of social determinants, factors, and contingencies, and an action-oriented hemisphere that identifies different forms and levels of mobilization that can guide rehabilitation practice to achieve social change in the lives of children, youth, and their families.Using an ecosocial perspective, this framework provides a roadmap for future research and policy development that is relevant to children and families as well as to current perspectives in rehabilitation, social and health justice, and childhood, disability, and neurodiversity rights.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.013
Science and technology studies0.0140.023
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207