Running head: DEINSTITUTIONALIZA TION & COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES Community Recreation and Leisure Activities in Adults with Developmental Disabilities who have Recently Relocated to Community-based Residences in Ontario
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2009, the Ontario Government closed the last three remaining large-scale institutions for people with Developmental Disabilities (DD). The purpose of this study is to examine the community-based recreation and leisure activities of 87 adults with DD who have recently moved into the community. Study 1 provided a descriptive insight into the community recreation and leisure activities, and revealed that people with DD engage in low levels of community activities, however are reported to have the desire to engage more often. Staff reported that people with DD do not have the opportunities to engage in their preferable activities. Study 2 investigated the prbspective predictors of the number and frequency of community, recreation and leisure activities and found that a higher level of functioning predicted a greater number of community activities (fJ =.26, P <.05), while both a higher level of functioning (fJ =.38,p <.001) and greater preference (fJ =.23. p <.05) predicted more frequent access to community activities. Future research and the implications of the findings for clinical practice and policy development were discussed.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it