Transitional Care Interventions for Youth With Disabilities: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Transition from the pediatric to the adult health care system is a complex process that should include medical, psychosocial, educational, recreational, and vocational considerations. OBJECTIVE: In this systematic review, we aim to synthesize the evidence on transitional care interventions (TCIs) to improve the quality of life (QoL) for adolescents and young adults with childhood-onset disabilities, including neurodevelopmental disorders. DATA SOURCES: Four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched. STUDY SELECTION: In the included studies, researchers examined TCIs for adolescents and young adults (12-24 years of age) with childhood-onset disabilities. Studies were experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies published in the last 26 years. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently completed study screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment. RESULTS: Fifty-two studies were included. Five studies reported on QoL, but statistically significant improvements were noted in only 1 of these studies. Significant improvements were also found in secondary outcomes including disability-related knowledge and transitional readiness. TCIs targeted patients, families and/or caregivers, and health care providers and exhibited great heterogeneity in their characteristics and components. LIMITATIONS: Inconsistent reporting on interventions between studies hindered synthesis of the relationships between specific intervention characteristics and outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is limited evidence on the impact of TCIs on the QoL for youth with childhood-onset disabilities, there is indication that they can be effective in improving patient and provider outcomes. The initiation of transition-focused care at an early age may contribute to improved long-term health outcomes in this population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".