Families’ perspectives on the process of community transitions of individuals with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities
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
BACKGROUND: Deinstitutionalisation refers to the transition of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities from large institutions to smaller homes in the community. The purpose of this study was to explore how family members of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities perceived their loved ones' community transition process. METHOD: Eight family members of persons with severe or profound intellectual and developmental disabilities formerly residing at the complex care facility of St.Amant participated in semi-structured interviews. Interview transcripts were analysed thematically using an iterative inductive process and constant comparative method. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged from the family members' accounts of their loved ones' community transitions process: 1) families' initial reactions, 2) strengths, and 3) challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Initial reactions of family members to learning about the community transitions process were varied. Family members' perspectives inform deinstitutionalisation efforts by highlighting facilitators such as adequate involvement, and barriers such as, unanticipated delays, to the community transitions process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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