Proposal for a new conceptual framework to guide early intervention professionals in a transcultural context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Parental engagement in early intervention programs for children with neurodevelopmental conditions is complex, particularly within transcultural contexts. This study examines current models of parental engagement to identify key factors that support inclusive approaches and to develop a flexible framework that addresses the realities of immigrant families raising children with neurodevelopmental conditions in transcultural settings. Methods: A critical nonsystematic review was conducted to integrate parental engagement models across multiple fields, aiming to develop a theoretical tool to guide a doctoral research project. Results: We found that current models often ignore transcultural realities and power dynamics. Therefore, we propose the Child-Parent-Professional Partnership framework, which provides a holistic ecological approach sensitive to the realities of immigrant parents. Limitations: The findings presented are inherently tentative and serve as a foundational basis for the empirical research design subsequently undertaken by the first author. Accordingly, the present article is intended to serve as an initial conceptual exploration, rather than a definitive analysis, and further empirical investigation is necessary to validate these primary insights and extend their scope. Conclusion: The proposed framework provides a comprehensive view of the influences affecting parental engagement in transcultural contexts, emphasizing the importance of an anti-oppressive approach to foster partnership that are attuned to the realities of immigrant parents. The originality of this framework lies in its integration of theoretical and practical approaches, offering both a conceptual lens to understand complex dynamics and a foundation for implementing authentic partnerships.
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 | 0.027 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".