“Everyone needs a purpose”: Service provider perspectives on young adults in long-term care in Northern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this qualitative study was to gain an understanding of the experience of young adults with disabilities entering long-term care from the perspective of six long-term care staff and community-based service providers in Northern Ontario. This study was approached with a social constructionist and critical social theory of disability worldview. This study sought to understand the implications associated with young adults residing in long-term care homes in Northern Ontario and to gain a better understanding of what the most appropriate housing options are for this population. A number of themes emerged including, inadequate community- based services, complex health and social needs, need for integrating health and social care, and proposed solutions. These themes point to a fragmented health care system that denies young adults with disabilities the right to choose where they wish to live and receive care. Contributing factors such as limited staffing, lack of training and environmental barriers minimize the opportunity for these individuals’ to live dignified lives while residing in long-term care homes. Findings from this study help identify policy planning needs for this population, from a Northern perspective. A number of recommendations are proposed including the creation of specialized units within the long-term care, increased staffing levels with specialized training, and collaboration of community partners for capacity building purposes. The recommendations also identify the need for a continuum of housing options to be available for young adults with disabilities and emphasizes the need for a province wide strategy for integrating health and social care.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".