FAMILY ADAPTATION TO DEVELOPMENTAL NEEDS OF THEIR CHILDREN WITH MULTIPLE DISABILITIES: A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT STUDY OF SOME SWEDISH AND CAMEROONIAN FAMILIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assesses, in a comparatively perspective, how some families adapt to daily routines of the developmental needs of their children with multiple disabilities in order to enhance their wellbeing and learning. The study sampled (N=20) parents from 10 families in Cameroon and Sweden using the mixed method approach to data collection and analysis. Findings reveal commonalities in family adaptation to their children’s health condition through: sacrificing extra time; rescheduling working hours; adjusting income, expenditure and plans; exploiting the available social support resources to meet the children’s special developmental needs. In addition, since parents perceive multiple disabilities as a critical health condition, they maximize the scope of support activities to enhance child development. In distinction, Cameroonian nucleus families are structurally larger in size than Swedish. Functionally, the former is dependent upon and interacts with extended family members while the latter makes use of outsiders ranging from professionals to pets for support services. In child functioning, children in the standardized monolingual society of Sweden change key communication partners indiscriminately whereas those in the multilingual society of Cameroon permanently cling to one or few partner(s) influential in enhancing their development. In conclusion, the study recommended that parents should be given more professional help and voice in policy making regarding the support of their children with multiple disabilities. Article visualizations:
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".