MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410032333 · doi:10.1080/09687599.2025.2498413

“Rooted in ableism:” an embedded mixed methods study of disability disclosure on a university campus

2025· article· en· W4410032333 on OpenAlex
Kathryn A. Szechy, Michael J. C. Bray, Nia Anderson, Ryan Wiseman, Lisa O’Donnell

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability & Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbleismSociologyDisability studiesPsychologyDisability discriminationDisabled peopleGerontologyMedia studiesGender studiesApplied psychologyPolitical scienceMedicineLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disabled higher education students are more likely to experience academic failure and lower rates of graduation. Disability disclosure is often required to receive supports associated with academic success. Disabled students at a large urban university in the United States (U.S.) responded to an online mixed methods needs assessment survey. Participants more likely to disclose disability were older, had received K-12 special education services, had needs not exclusive to mental health, had difficulty with a sense of belonging on campus and endorsed peer support as helpful to them. Qualitative analysis indicated disabled students considered self-advocacy and empowerment, needed supports, and anticipated stigma experiences when faced with disability disclosure decisions. Recommendations are made regarding campus culture, accessibility to supports and promoting overall higher education functioning for disabled students on a U.S. university campus.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.379 · 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