MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177564283 · doi:10.1080/09638288.2021.1945690

Using photo-elicitation to explore health promotion concepts with children and adolescents with disabilities: a rapid scoping review

2021· article· en· W3177564283 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalPublic Health OntarioToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPhoto elicitationInclusion (mineral)Health promotionPsychologyFocus groupMedical educationBrainstormingApplied psychologyPromotion (chess)MedicineNursingComputer scienceSocial psychologyKnowledge managementPublic healthSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: It is important to directly engage children and adolescents with disabilities (CAWD) in health promotion research to ensure their health needs are met. Arts-based research methods may help CAWD better express their ideas; photo-elicitation is one such technique, using self-captured photographs to enhance verbal descriptions of complex concepts. This review 1) summarizes findings from health promotion studies using photo-elicitation with CAWD; 2) explores benefits and challenges of using photo-elicitation; 3) identifies recommended photo-elicitation practices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A scoping review was conducted using rapid review principles. Four health and social science databases were searched (2009-2019) using terms related to children, adolescents, disability, and photo-elicitation. Articles meeting inclusion criteria were summarized and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Eight studies met inclusion criteria and explored a range of health promotion topics. Benefits of photo-elicitation included the ability to mediate communication and direct participants' focus. Challenges included difficulty operating a camera and understanding instructions about photograph subject matter. Four recommended practices were identified: 1) brainstorming photograph ideas; 2) photograph-taking training; 3) having CAWD select photographs for discussion; 4) limiting the number of photographs CAWD could capture. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating practices to support CAWD in using photo-elicitation can help researchers more fully understand their health experiences.Implications for RehabilitationThere is a need to directly engage children and adolescents with disabilities to express themselves in health promotion research.The arts-based method of photo-elicitation may help children and adolescents with disabilities convey how they view and experience health.Children and adolescents with disabilities may need supports, including camera training, to participate in photo-elicitation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.457
GPT teacher head0.606
Teacher spread0.148 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it