Transition to adulthood of adolescents with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities: Content validation of the SGU‐PIMD to support families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For families with adolescent children, the transition to adulthood is usually challenging. This period may be extra demanding for families with a child with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities due to the child's strong and persistent support needs. To support these families during this phase and to facilitate the transition process of these adolescents, we adapted the Canadian skills for growing up (SGU) into the skills for growing up-profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (SGU-PIMD). The aim of this study is to determine its content validity. METHOD: A Delphi study with family members and healthcare professionals was conducted. RESULTS: Results showed good content validity. However, the Delphi panel suggested minor adjustments to improve relevance, comprehensibility and comprehensiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The current SGU-PIMD can be used in practice for supporting adolescents with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities. However, there are also recommendations for research into the feasibility and acceptability of the instrument.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".