Current and ideal living arrangements and supports for Canadian adults with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (<scp>FASD</scp>)—Part I: Perspectives from adults with <scp>FASD</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adults with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) can thrive with lifelong support in daily living activities. Previous research examining living support for adults with FASD has heavily relied on caregiver reports rather than lived experiences, which can undermine opportunities for self-determination. In this study, we examined the perspectives of adults with FASD to better understand: (1) the ways in which they are supported with daily life activities; and (2) their ideal future living arrangements and supports. METHODS: This article presents findings from the perspective of adults with FASD as part of a broader project involving both adults with FASD and the caregivers who support them. Interviews were conducted with four Canadian adults with FASD who live in housing with supportive services and seven adults with FASD who live at home with the support of caregivers. Framework analyses, a structured approach to analyzing qualitative data, were used to examine participants' perspectives. RESULTS: In addition to providing support for previous findings, participants provided novel information regarding: (1) their daily living supports; (2) positive and negative aspects of their arrangements; and (3) ideal living environments and supports. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insight into participants' perspectives regarding their living support, which is critical to inform housing and aid in self-determination. Areas of support outlined by participants can be used to begin conversations regarding the support required in housing arrangements for adults with FASD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 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".