Youth narratives-in-action: Exploring the experience of participation in occupation for youth with neurological disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Adolescence is a critical developmental period during which youth with neurological disabilities often face barriers to participation in occupation. In occupational science, youth perspectives remain underrepresented in research, and the current literature largely relies on retrospective methods. This study sought to describe the experiences of participation in occupation for high school-aged youth with neurological disability by integrating observational and reflective methods.Methods: This study employed narrative-in-action methodology grounded in the life course perspective with two youth-parent dyads in the United States (n = 4). Data were collected using observations, interviews (photo-elicited and semi-structured), and informal conversations. Analysis was an iterative process following hermeneutic principles and employing narrative analysis and analysis of narratives.Findings and Discussion: Youth experiences of participation in occupation are presented through two narrative scenes, with three corresponding analytical points arising across both narratives: 1) habits and routines; 2) sense of body and linked-lives; and 3) lifespan development. These points revealed participation in occupation as an evolving, emplaced experience shaped by historical, relational, and spatial contexts. Emplacement—the situated and embodied engagement with place—emerged as a critical construct that illustrated how the youths’ mind, body, and environment interacted through pre-reflective and routine actions. This study advances occupational science by illustrating how youth experience participation as a dynamic integration of action, meaning, and place across the life course.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".