Changes in Overall Participation Profile of Youth with Physical Disabilities Following the PREP Intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pathways and Resources for Engagement and Participation (PREP), an environmental-based intervention, is effective in improving the participation of youth with disabilities in specific targeted activities; however, its potential impact on overall participation beyond these activities is unknown. This study examined the differences in participation levels and environmental barriers and supports following the 12-week PREP intervention. Existing data on participation patterns and environmental barriers and supports, measured by the Participation and Environment Measure for Children and Youth, pre-and post-PREP intervention, were statistically analyzed across 20 youth aged 12 to 18 (mean = 14.4, standard deviation (SD) = 1.82) with physical disabilities in three settings: home, school and community. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d. Following PREP, youth participated significantly less often at home (d = 2.21; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) [1.79, 2.96]), more often (d = 0.57; 95% CI [−0.79, −0.14]) and in more diverse activities (d = 0.51; 95% CI [−1.99, −0.51]) in the community. At school, significantly greater participation was observed in special school roles (t = −2.46. p = 0.024). Involvement and desire for change remained relatively stable across all settings. A substantial increase in community environmental supports was observed (d = 0.67), with significantly more parents reporting availability of, and access to information as a support (χ2 = 4.28, p = 0.038). Findings lend further support to the effectiveness of environmental-based interventions, involving real-life experiences.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".