“It’s Such an Inclusive and Welcoming Environment”: Caregiver Perspectives of a Play-Based Program for Autistic Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Play-based programs provide therapeutic benefits to children and youth with disabilities and their caregivers. However, there is limited literature regarding the effects of these programs on the physical and psychosocial outcomes for autistic children andyouth. Objective: This program evaluation examined the perspectives of caregivers of autistic children and youth ages 6–18 years in a play-based program in Nova Scotia. Methods: A qualitative case evaluation design was employed, with 10 caregivers completing semi-structured interviews. Interviews were conducted virtually using Microsoft Teams and were each approximately 60 minutes in length. Interview data were transcribed verbatim and transferred to NVivo. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Three themes were generated: (a) Play (in Their Own Way) is Beneficial, (b) An Important Respite for Families, and (c) A Lot Can Get in the Way of Participation. Findings illustrated that caregivers perceived the program as beneficial for their child’s physical and psychosocial development skills. They also highlighted the need for family respite time to rest and recharge. Caregivers noted that there are relatively few inclusive programs specifically for autistic children, and that lack of transportation and high costs can reduce accessibility of programs. Conclusion: Play-based programs have notable caregiver-perceived benefits for autistic children and youth, but there may be barriers to participation as well. Findings of this program evaluation may help knowledge users and service providers address program barriers and inform programming moving forward.
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".