Quality of life trajectories in persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities undergoing community transition in Central Canada: A longitudinal repeated measures study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strong evidence suggests that, compared to congregate care, dispersed community living offers significant quality of life (QoL) benefits for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. However, it is still unclear whether these improvements apply to all domains of QoL or if they remain stable long term. AIMS: This study investigated QoL trajectories across four time points over a 4-year period (2019-2022) in a cohort of Canadian adults with severe-to-profound intellectual and developmental disabilities and extensive support needs who transitioned from an institutional setting to dispersed community group homes in Central Canada. METHODS: A repeated measures quasi-experimental time-series study, without control group was used to address the stated research objective. Four waves of QoL data on 59 study participants was collected using the proxy-report standardized assessment tool San Martin Scale and analyzed at both the individual and aggregate levels using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: The mean QoL scores of the study cohort across eight QoL domains changed significantly across timepoints, with the highest scores at the first post-transition assessment and a general decline towards pre-transition levels by the last assessment. Global QoL followed a similar pattern. Notably, some QoL domains showed unique patterns of change. Individual QoL trajectories were highly variable, with some participants experiencing transient improvements and others maintaining sustained gains. IMPLICATIONS: Continued efforts to promote the QoL of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities should be rooted in a transformative social justice framework emphasizing equity, inclusion, and health and well-being as universal human rights.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".