EXPERIENCES AND SUPPORT NEEDS OF FAMILIES RAISING ADOLESCENTS WITH PROFOUND INTELLECTUAL AND MULTIPLE DISABILITIES DURING THE TRANSITION TO ADULTHOOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a lack of knowledge about families raising adolescents with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) during the transition to adulthood. This study explores the experiences and support needs of these families throughout this transition. A qualitative design was used, consisting of semi-structured interviews with mothers (N = 10) of children aged 10 to 23 with PIMD. The interviews were analyzed via a coding scheme based on a theoretical framework for family quality of life (FQOL) and stages of adolescence. Positive and negative experiences and distinct support needs were examined in the FQOL domains and stages of adolescence. These families have a unique need for information on development and participation opportunities for children with PIMD, and how to support them. Other needs and experiences expressed, such as dealing with hormonal changes and with being transferred from paediatric to adult care services, were consistent with other families with support needs. The obtained knowledge can be used to improve support for families with an adolescent child with PIMD. In addition, future research in this area is recommended and should be grounded in a family-centred, strengths-based, longitudinal approach.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".