Using a Health Promotion Approach to Frame Parent Experiences of Family Routines and Their Significance for Health and Well-being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational therapy providers working with young children and their families in early intervention settings frequently provide interventions to support family routines related to social participation, health management, and related occupations at home and in the community. Family routines are inextricably tied to individual and family health and well-being, yet contextual influences can impact satisfaction with and performance of routines resulting in disparities in health and occupational outcomes. A health promotion approach to intervention is intended to address contextual aspects of occupational performance in natural settings, and therefore, may be a useful approach for providing family-centered, routines-based intervention in early intervention settings. This basic qualitative study used interview methods to collect perspectives about family routines from two parent participants. The participants were from a broader pilot project on family mental health intervention that was implemented with eight families and were the only two parents who volunteered to complete additional interviews. The life course health development framework was used to guide study design and data analysis. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded using conventional qualitative content analysis. Themes were validated through expert and member checks. Participant data from the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure was also available from the broader project and was used to triangulate findings. Resulting themes illustrated the complexity of family routines, influence of values and often hidden parental decision making on routines, connectedness of routines with family health and well-being, and impact of contextual influences on routines. Findings inform the importance of considering contextual factors when providing family-centered, routines-based intervention and suggest the fit for a health promotion approach to intervention given the inter-relatedness of family routines with outcomes such as health and well-being.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".