Identifying Coping Strategies in Parents of Children With Neurodevelopmental Disorders: A Qualitative Inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to explore and identify coping strategies employed by parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders, focusing on emotional, social, practical, and resilience-based dimensions of adaptation. A qualitative research design was adopted, utilizing semi-structured interviews with 23 parents of children diagnosed with neurodevelopmental disorders residing in Canada. Participants were recruited purposively through support groups, clinical networks, and community organizations. Interviews, lasting between 45 and 90 minutes, were conducted either face-to-face or online, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached. NVivo 14 software supported data organization and thematic analysis, following Braun and Clarke’s six-phase framework. Credibility and trustworthiness were enhanced through peer debriefing, independent coding, reflexive memoing, and the use of thick description. Analysis revealed four overarching themes: (1) Emotional coping—including stress management, emotional expression, reframing, self-compassion, and hope maintenance; (2) Social support strategies—such as peer support, family involvement, professional guidance, online communities, and workplace flexibility; (3) Practical coping—involving structured routines, resource utilization, problem-solving, and information-seeking behaviors; and (4) Personal growth and resilience—comprising identity transformation, spiritual coping, meaning-making, empowerment through knowledge, and self-care practices. Illustrative quotations from participants highlighted how coping strategies were dynamically employed to navigate ongoing challenges and sustain parental well-being. Parents of children with neurodevelopmental disorders adopt multifaceted coping strategies that extend beyond stress relief to encompass resilience-building and personal growth. These findings underscore the importance of designing culturally and contextually relevant interventions that strengthen parental coping resources, enhance family adaptation, and improve overall quality of life.
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 | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".