Intersection of physical and mental health of youth with brachial plexus birth injuries: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Youth with brachial plexus birth injuries (BPBI) have an increased risk of mental health issues such as depression, anxiety, and diminished self-confidence. Despite this evidence, current standards of care focus on physical interventions. Evaluation of psychological and emotional concerns is rarely prioritized in clinical settings. Therefore, mental health needs are unmet and poorly understood. Methods: An interpretivist qualitative approach was used to understand the perspectives of youth with BPBI and their caregivers on the barriers and facilitators of addressing mental health concerns, to inform practice guidelines, and promote meaningful participation within this population. Results: A purposeful sample of nine youth with BPBI between 10 to 20 years and eight caregivers participated in in-depth interviews. The interviews were semi-structured and an average of 60 min (35-85 min) long. Three themes emerged from these data: (i) physical disability identity and mental health; (ii) pursuit of "normal" body image; and (iii) paradox of advocacy. Findings illuminated the intersection of physical and mental health in these youth and provides actionable practice recommendations. Areas of need were identified including mental health support around the challenges of advocacy, body image, surgery, and preparation for the 'aging out' process for youth and their families. Conclusions: The well-being of youth with BPBI is a result of the intersection between their physical and mental health. Further research on optimizing mental health resources within physical health settings is needed to better support the holistic needs of these youth and their families.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".