“We’re a lot closer, we talk more”: family experiences and relationships following child’s participation in an adapted physical activity camp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Children and adolescents with developmental challenges may rely on their parents for assistance with everyday tasks to a greater extent than typically developing children. The objective of this study was to examine family members' perspectives regarding family relationships related to participation in an adapted summer camp for children and adolescents living with a disability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A collective case study was conducted with eleven families who had a child living with a disability who participated in an adapted physical activity (PA) summer camp. A focus group was conducted with each family and thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Families experienced changes in perspectives and pride surrounding adapted PA, more family conversations about disability, less parental worry, more independence of the child living with a disability, and enhanced family bonds through PA. The children who participated in the camp saw impacts on their self-confidence and independence. COVID-19-related program suspension was associated with frustration, worry, and strained family relationships. CONCLUSIONS: These findings elucidate how participation in adapted PA for children and youth with disabilities can impact family relationships. Future interventions allow for space for family interactions and create opportunity for children and adolescents with disabilities to be independent.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".