MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220777385 · doi:10.1111/jppi.12415

Key learnings from <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 to sustain quality of life for families of individuals with <scp>IDD</scp>

2022· article· en· W4220777385 on OpenAlexaff
Rachael W. Wanjagua, Stevie‐Jae Hepburn, Rhonda Faragher, Shaji Thomas John, K Gayathri, Margaret Gitonga, Cecylia Francis Meshy, Lucena Miranda, Devis Sindano

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Quality (philosophy)BusinessGerontologyMedicineComputer scienceComputer securityDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

COVID-19 has very publicly had profound impacts on the health system of every country in the world. Over 4.5 million people have lost their lives. School closures worldwide where up to 1.6 billion of the world's children have been out of school, are also prominent in world news. Behind these public impacts are the families. In this paper, we focus on the experiences of families with people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) through analysis of two data sets: the emerging research literature and contributions from our author team who have lived experience of intellectual and developmental disability in the context of COVID-19. From these two data sets, we discern five themes of the impact of the pandemic: on health, on education, on services and supports, on families and finally on relationships beyond the family. We conclude with lessons from those living with intellectual and developmental disabilities, the carers and the individuals themselves to draw implications for supporting families in the context of disability during future pandemics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.003

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual DisabilitiesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207