“What Services?”: Stakeholders’ Perceived Unmet Support Needs for Parents With Neurological Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Knowledge about the needs of parents with neurological disorders who take care of young children is limited. Purpose. The overall aim of this qualitative study was to explore the perceived unmet parent needs, current supports, and potential solutions to optimize supports of parents with neurological disorders in early childhood in a Canadian setting. Method. Focus groups and individual interviews with parents ( n = 8), spouses ( n = 5), rehabilitation clinicians ( n = 8), community partners ( n = 7), and researchers ( n = 7) were conducted with a total of 35 participants recruited using convenience sampling. Inductive iterative thematic analysis was performed. Findings. The participants identified the need for society to officially recognize parenting with disabilities, adjust public policies, increase the scope of public programs, consider child development and family well-being, and have barrier-free communities. Conclusion. Providing customized solutions that will adequately fill perceived service gaps is of utmost importance to address these families’ needs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".