MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406937050 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs154202422251

QUALITY OF LIFE OF TYPICALLY DEVELOPING SIBLINGS OF PEOPLE WITH PROFOUND INTELLECTUAL AND MULTIPLE DISABILITIES IN POLAND

2024· article· en· W4406937050 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jakub Niedbalski

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Intellectual disabilityDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Family quality of life (FQOL) is a concept that is gaining increasing importance in family support programmes. However, for some countries, this concept has been insufficiently explored in relation to families with children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The aim of this study was to ascertain the perceived QOL of siblings of children with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD) living in Poland. The study relies on a qualitative research approach. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 siblings aged 6 to 15, followed by thematic analysis. The siblings identified the following nine domains as dimensions that impacted their QOL: joint activities, mutual understanding, private time, acceptance, forbearance, effect on well-being, exchanging experiences, social support, and dealing with the outside world. The children described both positive and negative experiences, indicating that having a sibling with intellectual and developmental disabilities affected their QOL in diverse ways.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207