A community engaged approach to examining quality of life and service navigation in Korean families of autistic children in BC, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few studies to date have explored the experiences of racialized and ethno-cultural families raising autistic children in multicultural contexts such as Canada.Research conducted in the US and Canada have identified strengths and difficulties related to family functioning and coping strategies used by immigrant parents.Additionally, this research has also identified barriers and facilitators to accessing diagnostic and other autism services across the lifespan.However, the majority of these studies have broadly categorized immigrant populations, potentially masking important differences within panethnic populations.In Canada, and British Columbia (BC) specifically, one of the largest and fastest growing visible minority groups are Koreans (Statistics Canada, 2017).Yet despite this, no studies to date have examined the experiences and perceptions of Korean immigrant parents of autistic children living in BC.This gap in the research has become increasingly urgent given the growing prevalence rates of autism and the highly complex service system in Canada, which varies considerably across provinces.This research utilized a community engaged approach and qualitative methodology to explore quality of life, service navigation, and coping strategies among 25 Korean parents of autistic children (5-33 years) living in BC.This study addressed three aims.First, parents' conceptualizations and descriptions of family quality of life (FQOL) were explored.Analyses revealed three themes that were central to their definitions of FQOL: family cohesiveness, value orientation, and acceptance from society.Second, parents' perceptions of barriers and facilitators to accessing autism services were examined.Barriers at the system (e.g., ineffective school policies), provider (e.g., negative attitudes, lack of service navigation support), and family level (e.g., stigma) were identified.Facilitators included family-centered care (system level), culturally competent and bilingual professionals (provider level), and connections to cultural community organizations (family level).Third, a subset of caregivers (n=12) representing both high and low levels of FQOL shared their coping strategies on how they came to terms with their child's diagnosis and manage stress.The results are discussed linking previous research to current findings and considered in terms of practice and policy implications with future areas of research identified.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".