Developmental Disability: Families and Functioning in Child and Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) provides an integrated framework for health for everyone. Several aspects of this approach to health allow us to see people's lives in a richer and more holistic manner than has traditionally been the case based on diagnosis alone. These features include the positive language (emphasizing in particular "activity," "participation," and "personal factors"); the interconnections of the parts of this "dynamic system," in which every component can influence every other one; and the formal inclusion of "contextual factors"-personal and environmental-that are otherwise too easy to take for granted and then ignore. This paper addresses the "environmental" dimension of the ICF framework-specifically referring to "family" as the central environmental force in the lives of children and adolescents. The perspectives of the author are those of a developmental pediatrician, whose career has focused on children with conditions that challenge their development, and their families. Lessons learned from a lifetime of work-including teaching and research as well as clinical services-are offered. Particular emphases will be on (i) the importance of focusing on the family in a non-judgmental "family-centered" way; (ii) how conceptual ideas about child (and family) development and parenting are as important as technical approaches to intervention; and (iii) how the ICF framework "allows"-indeed encourages-such a focus to have value and importance equal to the best of biomedical interventions. Examples from current research will illustrate how these ideas can be implemented.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".