Participation profiles in domestic life and peer relations as experienced by adolescents with and without impairments and long-term health conditions

Figures & data

Table 1. Overview of cluster labels.

Cluster	Label
1	Higher perceived importance than frequency of attending
2	Low domestic participation but high participation in peer relations
3	High level of participation
4	Relatively low general level of participation
5	Very low level of participation both in domestic life and in peer relations
6	High participation in domestic life, low frequency of participation with peers
7	High level domestic activity participation
8	Low participation in domestic life
9	High frequency of participation with lower level of perceived importance in peer relations

Table 2. ANOVA results including means and standard deviations for independent variables for the nine clusters and differences between clusters.

		Cluster 1	Cluster 2	Cluster 3	Cluster 4	Cluster 5	Cluster 6	Cluster 7	Cluster 8	Cluster 9
Independent variable	Sample mean and (sd) ^a	n = 176	n = 220	n = 81	n = 199	n = 39	n = 234	n = 110	n = 132	n = 158	F-values ^(p-values) b
B180 Experience of time and self	2.09 (0.43)	2.01 (0.39)^Citation3	2.16 (0.40)	2.27 (0.41)^Citation1	2.07 (0.45)	1.97 (0.37)	2.08 (0.43)	2.11 (0.42)	2.10 (0.43)	2.13 (0.44)	3.94
D240 Stress	2.49 (0.49)	2.45 (0.49)	2.56 (4.38)	2.58 (0.43)	2.38 (0.50)	2.24 (0.56)	2.54 (0.43)	2.50 (0.49)	2.45 (0.51)	2.56 (0.52)	4.61
D3 Discussion	2.30 (0.50)	2.25 (0.45)^Citation3	2.39 (0.47)^Citation5,Citation8	2.55 (0.44) ^Citation1,Citation4,Citation5,Citation8	2.23 (0.49)^Citation3	1.95 (0.57) ^Citation2,Citation3,Citation6,Citation9	2.40 (0.44)^Citation5	2.29 (0.51)	2.16 (0.53)^Citation2,Citation3,Citation6	2.34 (0.52)^Citation2,Citation3,Citation6	9.44
E3 support from siblings	2.84 (0.77)	2.78 (0.67)^Citation3,Citation5,Citation6	3.02 (0.71)^Citation4,Citation5	3.18 (0.69)^Citation1,Citation4,Citation5,Citation9	2.51 (0.78)^Citation2,Citation3,Citation6	2.24 (0.87) ^Citation1–Citation3,Citation6,Citation8,Citation9	3.10 (0.68)	2.76 (0.85)	2.82 (0.74)^Citation5	2.77 (0.76)^Citation3,Citation5,Citation6	15.27
E4 atmosphere within family	1.78 (0.29)	1.8 (0.30)	1.72 (0.2) ^Citation4,Citation8	1.73(0.29)^Citation2,Citation6	1.85 (0.31)	1.91 (0.32)^Citation6	1.71 (0.25)^Citation4,Citation5,Citation8	1.76 (0.26)	1.89 (0.31)^Citation2,Citation6,Citation9	1.75 (0.29)^Citation8	8.42
Homogeneity coefficient*		0.74	0.87	0.42	0.87	1.51	0.65	0.62	1.26	0.63

^a Significant differences between clusters ^1–9 p < 0.05

^b All values significant at p < 0.001

*Degree of proximity (similarity or dissimilarity) between cases within the clusters. The lower the coefficient, the better the homogeneity within a cluster (Bergman et al.⁴⁹).

Table 3. Demographic information on adolescents in the nine clusters.

	Number of individuals	Female (%)	Male (%)	Having a sibling (%)	No impairment or long-term health condition (%)	Neuro-developmental disorder (%) ^a	Physical impairment ^(%)^b	Both physical impairment and neuro-developmental disorder (%)
Cluster 1	n = 176	44.3	55.7	89.7	43.8	7.4	34.1	14.8
Cluster 2	n = 220	58.6	41.4	89.1	51.8	6.4	33.2	8.6
Cluster 3	n = 81	51.9	48.1	93.8	49.4	11.1	29.6	9.9
Cluster 4	n = 199	45.2	54.8	88.4	47.2	7.5	30.2	15.1
Cluster 5	n = 39	28.2	71.8	82.1	41.o	7.7	38.5	12.8
Cluster 6	n = 234	66.7	33.3	88.0	47.4	3.4	39.7	9.4
Cluster 7	n = 110	60.9	39.1	92.5	50.9	8.2	29.1	11.8
Cluster 8	n = 132	34.8	65.2	90.8	43.2	9.8	36.4	10.6
Cluster 9	n = 158	56.3	43.7	91.1	56.3	7.0	28.5	8.2

^a IADHD, Autism, Intellectual disability, speech and language impairment/communication disorder, anxiety, epilepsy, ADHD, ASD, Dyslexia, Dyscalculia

^b e.g. Indigestion, asthma, allergic rhinitis, eczema, overweight

Figure 1. Patterns of participation regarding frequency and perceived importance in domestic life and peer relations.

Adolescence development. 2017. [accessed 2017 Sep 6]. http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/topics/adolescence/dev/en/.

 Google Scholar

Law M. Participation in the occupations of everyday life. Am J Occup Ther. 2002;56(6):640–49.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Dunst CJ, Bruder MB, Trivette CM, Hamby DW. Everyday activity settings, natural learning environments, and early intervention practices. J Policy Pract Intell Dis. 2006;3(1):3–10. doi:10.1111/j.1741-1130.2006.00047.x.

 Google Scholar

Bölte S, Schipper E, Holtmann M, Karande S, Vries P, Selb M, Tannock R. Development of icf core sets to standardize assessment of functioning and impairment in adhd: the path ahead. Eur Adolesc Psych. 2014;23(12):1139–48. doi:10.1007/s00787-013-0496-5.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Imms C, Granlund M, Wilson PH, Steenbergen B, Rosenbaum PL, Gordon AM. Participation, both a means and an end: A conceptual analysis of processes and outcomes in childhood disability. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2017 Jan; 59(1):16-25.

 Google Scholar

UNICEF. Convention on the Rights of the Child. 1989. https://www.unicef.org/crc/ Accessed 2017 February 4

 Google Scholar

Sheldon KM, Ryan RM, Deci EL, Kasser T. The independent effects of goal contents and motives on well-being: it’s both what you pursue and why you pursue it. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2004;30(4):475–86.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Fayed N, De Camargo OK, Kerr E, Rosenbaum P, Dubey A, Bostan C, Faulhaber M, Raina P, Cieza A. Generic patient-reported outcomes in child health research: A review of conceptual content using world health organization definitions. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2012;54(12):1085–95. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8749.2012.04393.x.

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Bergman LR, Magnusson D, El Khouri BM. Studying individual development in an interindividual context: A person-oriented approach. Mahwah: Psychology Press; 2003.

 Google Scholar