Fathers Matter: Enhancing Healthcare Experiences Among Fathers of Children With Developmental Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Being a parent of a child with a developmental disability (DD; e. g., cerebral palsy, autism) comes with great challenges and apprehensions. Mothers and fathers of children with DD are experiencing heightened levels of psychological distress, physical health problems, financial difficulties, social isolation, and struggles with respect to traditional parenting roles. In relation to the latter, the involvement of fathers in caregiving in today's society is increasing and is highlighted by its importance and positive contribution to the development of their children. However, fathers of children with DD report feeling excluded and marginalized by healthcare providers (HCPs) when arranging for and getting involved in healthcare services for their children. Currently, there is limited evidence as to what factors influence those experiences. We aimed to explore barriers to and facilitators of positive and empowering healthcare experiences, from the perspectives of fathers of children with DD and HCPs. Methods: A mixed-method approach, such as quantitative (survey) and qualitative (semi-structured interview) strategies, was used. Participants were fathers of children with DD and HCPs working in childhood disability. Data analysis consisted of using descriptive statistics and an inductive-thematic analysis of emergent themes. Results: Fathers ( n = 7) and HCPs ( n = 13, 6 disciplines) participated. The fathers indicated that while they were moderate to very much satisfied with their interactions with HCPs, they reported that HCPs were only sometimes attentive to them during interactions. Fathers also revealed that positive interactions with HCPs in relation to their children had multiple benefits. Several themes related to barriers and facilitators of optimal interactions and parent–professional relationships emerged. These included session factors (time, attention), personal factors (knowledge of the condition, child and healthcare system, acceptance vs. denial, previous experiences, culture, stereotypes, pre-existing beliefs, stress levels, working schedule), and family dynamics. The participants offered several insights into the different strategies that can be implemented to promote optimal interactions between fathers and HCPs. Conclusion: We identified several barriers, facilitators, and improvement strategies for optimal interactions and enhanced parent–professional relationships from the perspectives of fathers and HCPs. These can be integrated by existing clinical settings in efforts to enhance current clinical practices and improve child- and parent-related outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".