Availability and Quality of Web Resources for Parents of Children With Disability: Content Analysis and Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The internet is a valuable resource for parents of typical children, who are looking for information about their children's growth and development and how to boost them. However, for parents of children with special needs, especially for non-English-speaking parents, there are anecdotal reports stating that specific and accurate information is not available on the internet. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe the type of information available on the internet for French-speaking parents of children with disability as well as assess the quality of the information collected. METHODS: We carried out a search of the existing relevant websites targeted at parents of children with disability. We used a validated instrument to extract structural, textual, and visual characteristics of these websites and evaluate their usability. RESULTS: In all, 42 websites were analyzed; of these, the information had been validated by a trustworthy source in only 18 (43%) websites. Networking opportunities for parents were available in only 7 (17%) websites. Most websites provided information related to autism spectrum disorder (20/42, 42%) and learning disabilities (19/42, 45%), and only a few websites discussed other disability types such as behavorial disorders and developmental language disorders (4/42, 10% each). Community, social, and civic life (9/42, 22%); domestic life (12/42, 29%); and mobility (15/42, 36%) were the less frequently covered topics. With regard to the usability evaluation, 22 of the 42 (52%) websites received a global score <70%, whereas 20 (48%) scored ≥70. CONCLUSIONS: Although the internet is an infinite source of information, it is not necessarily actionable for parents of children with disability. Some information remains difficult to find online, and networking opportunities with other parents dealing with similar challenges are scarce.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".