Occupational Balance Among Parents of Typically Developing Children and Parents of Children With Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Parenting may influence perceptions of occupational balance (OB), particularly among parents of children with disabilities (PCWD). OBJECTIVE: To compare OB among PCWD and parents of typically developing children (PTDC), identify potential predictors of OB, and examine the association between OB and family quality of life (FQOL). DESIGN: Cross-sectional group-comparison design. SETTING: Two hospitals under the Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. Data were collected between November 2020 and February 2021. PARTICIPANTS: PCWD attending occupational therapy clinics and PTDC from the hospital staff and their relatives were recruited through convenience sampling. Participants were 89 PCWD and 89 PTDC, of whom 38% spoke Arabic, and 62% spoke English. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The revised 11-item Occupational Balance Questionnaire and the short version of the Family Quality of Life Survey-2006 were used to measure outcome variables. An investigator-developed demographic survey was used to collect information on independent variables. All data collection forms were available in English and Arabic. The hypothesis was generated before data were collected. RESULTS: Statistically significant but marginal differences were found in OB between PTDC and PCWD (M difference = 1.87, p = .02; 95% confidence interval [0.331, 3.339]). A moderate association existed between OB and FQOL among PCWD (r = .57, p = .001) and PTDC (r = .31, p = .003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Occupational therapists working with families of young children may find it helpful to assess OB and address OB-related issues to facilitate better FQOL. What This Article Adds: Parenting young children affects OB regardless of the disability status of the child. Role satisfaction and spousal support are possible intervention targets to improve OB and thereby improve 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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".