MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412751768 · doi:10.32920/ihtp.v5i2.2470

Nursing care for youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities in the times of COVID-19: Toward a Nursing Practice Competency Framework

2025· article· en· W4412751768 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Attia Khan, Nazilla Khanlou, Luz María Vázquez, Iris Epstein, Rani Srivastava, Susan VanDeVelde‐Coke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Health Trends and Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Psychology2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Intellectual disabilityMedicinePsychiatryVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) face interlocking inequities in access to healthcare services. Nurses require education and training in specific competencies to address their needs. This cross-sectional study explored the experiences and perspectives of youth with IDD on nursing care in the times of COVID-19 restrictions across 4 provinces in Canada. Methods: Nine youth (16-29 years) completed a virtual survey: without assistance of caregiver parent (n=3), supported by a parent (n=3), and represented by parent proxy (n=3). Close-ended Likert-type questions assessed health, mental health, and Quality of Care and Support (QOCS). Open-ended questions addressed Person-and-Family-centred Care (PFCC), communication and behaviour management. At the analytical stage the qualitative and quantitative data were integrated applying concurrent mixed-methods principles. Results: Emerging themes include: 1) Limited access to quality of care (e.g., dismissive attitude, safety concerns, insufficient respite funding, unaffordable care, shortage of nurses prepared in developmental disability, complicated program enrolment process, insufficient knowledge on IDD rights and services, competency and professionalism); 2) Person-and-Family-Centered Care (e.g., experiences of PFCC, not a Person-Centered care; 3) Communication is key to quality nursing care; and 4) Inadequate emotional support (e.g., respect and value youths’ wishes, nurses need emotional support too). Conclusion: Barriers to quality nursing care for youth with IDD include lack of communication skills, emotional support, and Person-and-Family-Centered Care. Nursing care tailored to the needs of persons with IDD is crucial for their health and wellbeing and requires structural changes at the macro (enhanced funding for program/services), meso (education, curricula, training), and individual levels (awareness).

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.472
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

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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Health Trends and PerspectivesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207