Types and factors affecting and impact of ableism among Asian children and youth with disabilities and their caregivers: a systematic review of quantitative studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Asian children and youth with disabilities often experience multiple barriers and discrimination in education, healthcare, and social settings, which influence their well-being, especially the transition to adulthood. This review aims to explore the types, factors affecting and impact of ableism on Asian children and youth with disabilities and their caregivers. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and a narrative synthesis whereby we searched the literature from six international databases, including Healthstar, Ovid Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies were included in the review, and three themes were identified that related to ableism: (1) types and rates of ableism (i.e., stigma, bullying and victimization, and discrimination and inequalities); (2) factors affecting ableism (i.e. sociodemographic factors, familial factors, and societal factors); and (3) impacts of ableism (i.e. mental health, family impacts, and societal impacts). CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights that ableism has various types and can be influenced by multiple factors, influencing social and health outcomes of Asian families with children and youth with disabilities. This review also emphasizes the importance of increasing the public's awareness regarding disabilities to reduce ableism among Asian families with children with disabilities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".