A qualitative analysis of parent’s perceptions of available social support systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Difficulties in social communication and interaction skills characteristic of autism are reported to play a critical role in high parenting stress. A widely acknowledged lack of effective supports make it more likely that parents of autistic children continue to experience increasingly greater levels of parenting stress over time. The current study aimed to further understand parent perceptions of social supports following their completion of a parent-implemented social skills intervention for their autistic child. Specifically, we explored additional supports beyond those targeting their child that parents of autistic children may perceive as necessary. We interviewed seven parents with autistic children to better understand their perception of the support systems available to, and utilized by, them. Inductive thematic analysis generated two primary themes: (1) parent’s emotions as leading of support needs and (2) support networks utilized or sought after by parents of autistic children. Our findings highlight the experiences and feelings of parents of autistic children regarding the support systems they perceive to be available and those they use and/or need. An understanding of parent experiences and perceived needs can be used to promote change, in particular, specific parent support following diagnosis and throughout the intervention process to encourage parent psychological well-being may be beneficial.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".