The International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Opposes the Human Cost From Military Conflict: A Position Statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The International Association for the Scientific Study of Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IASSIDD) is an international group of researchers, clinicians, students, parents, carers, and self‐advocates that actively promotes worldwide research and information exchange about intellectual and developmental disabilities. IASSIDD does not speak to the legitimacy or legality of any ongoing war or armed conflict. The purpose of this article is to promote respect for the human dignity of all persons with intellectual and other developmental disabilities, and their families, who find themselves in such situations. Therefore, the aim of this article is to outline the impact that military conflict has upon people with developmental disabilities, and their families, and to introduce the IASSIDD position statement that opposes the human cost from military conflict. During military conflict, many children and adults with intellectual and other developmental disabilities, and their families, experience marked suffering and maltreatment. This occurs due to an inability to access healthcare, education, and rehabilitation, and is also due to serious physical injuries, starvation, psychological trauma, and of course death, caused directly by conflict. This group is disproportionately affected due to preexisting vulnerabilities, and they are likely to experience human rights violations. Challenging behaviour is likely to increase, and quality of life decrease, during conflict. Addressing need during conflict requires a multifaceted approach that includes humanitarian aid, psychological support, social support, rehabilitation services, caregiver support, and coordinated international efforts and advocacy. There has been too little research about the experiences of people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities, and their families, during military conflict. We know little about the number of refugees with intellectual and other developmental disabilities fleeing, nor do we have robust data about the number of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities who die, during military conflict. The basic human rights of people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities, and their families, are violated during military conflict; this is contrary to the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2475 as these rights are enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the United Nations Millennium Goals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.069 | 0.091 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.075 | 0.075 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.011 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".