Transitioning into adulthood with mild intellectual disability and mental health problems: experiences of young people and parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Transitioning into adulthood (including adult healthcare) is challenging for adolescents with mild intellectual disability (MID) and mental health problems. This qualitative study investigates the transition experiences of these youths and their parents’, in order to optimize support.Methods Nine youths (aged 16–28) and four parents were interviewed. Questions concerned expectations of, or experiences with, the transition and associated problems or positive aspects. Inductive thematic analysis was used.Results Youths and parents described many changes across various life domains, which caused high levels of stress. Timely preparations, information, and practical support facilitated a successful transition. Participants emphasized the need for continuity of care and autonomy.Conclusions Preparations for the transition are recommended to be initiated at the age of 16. These should include: providing practical information, discussing changes in responsibilities, and engagement of the support network. Youths with MID and mental health problems prefer to be involved in decision making after being properly informed by professionals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".