Family Quality of Life and Support: Perceptions of Family Members of Children with Disabilities in Ethiopia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been increasing attention to quality of life for families supporting children with disabilities internationally; however, there is minimal research on family quality of life (FQOL) in low-income countries, and specifically in African contexts. This study explored how Ethiopian families of children with disabilities conceptualised FQOL and what they perceived their support needs related to FQOL were. Using a qualitative exploratory descriptive design, we interviewed Ethiopian family members of children with various disabilities. Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim and translated into English with professional translation assistance. We analysed translated transcripts inductively based on Braun and Clarke’s approach to thematic analysis. We found that spirituality was core to families and that they described FQOL in terms of their relationships within the immediate family and with the community. Additionally, families wanted to be self-sufficient and provide for themselves, but with the additional challenges of raising a child with a disability and pervasive poverty, they recognised their need for more support. Therefore, providing holistic, family-centred services to Ethiopian families of children with disabilities can contribute to enhancing FQOL.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 it