MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The role of Activities of Daily Living in the empowerment process of people with disabilities

2023· article· en· W4385635335 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Isabel Ribeiro Duarte, Mónica Teixeira, Cristiana Dias de Almeida

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Temas Sociais · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Policies
Canadian institutionsEntomological Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentAutonomyPromotion (chess)Inclusion (mineral)Social model of disabilityIntellectual disabilityContext (archaeology)Intervention (counseling)PsychologyDisadvantageCapability approachActivities of daily livingSocial psychologyPublic relationsPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conceptual model of disability is based on the expression of limitations of a person's individual functioning in a social context that clearly represents a disadvantage for the subject himself. The importance of social inclusion and the promotion of the autonomy of people with intellectual disabilities are two crucial aspects of the intervention and, at the same time, they are conceptually interconnected. This synergy makes it possible to understand the connection between both and the importance that each one represents in the lives of people with intellectual disabilities. In this way, generically, inclusion confers the notion of belonging, equality and responsibility towards the other elements and, in turn, autonomy confers freedom of choice and the satisfaction of a personal desire. This conceptual exploration work has as its central objective, to emphasize the importance of the existence of integrated intervention in terms of maintenance and training of Activities of Daily Living and their constituents in people with intellectual disabilities. It is concluded that the achievement of overcoming the difficulties of individuals with intellectual disabilities integrates individual involvement supported by their personal networks and the mobilization of society.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Temas SociaisSame topicSocial Sciences and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207