Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System

Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of environmental research and public health 2021-03, Vol.18 (5), p.2697, Article 2697
Hauptverfasser: Suzurikawa, Jun, Sawada, Yuki, Sakiyama, Miwa, Suwa, Motoi, Inoue, Takenobu, Kondo, Tomoko
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 5
container_start_page 2697
container_title International journal of environmental research and public health
container_volume 18
creator Suzurikawa, Jun
Sawada, Yuki
Sakiyama, Miwa
Suwa, Motoi
Inoue, Takenobu
Kondo, Tomoko
description Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and a professional team. Under Japanese governmental ATD provision system, based on the application by clients, ATDs are mainly selected through collaborative processes with the clients and health professionals in public organizations, rehabilitation counseling centers (RCCs). By employing qualitative study methods in this study, we investigated the ATD selection process in which health professionals in RCCs collaboratively assess clients with physical disabilities so as to support them in selecting the adequate ATDs. To identify the perspectives required for ATD selection completely, the assessment processes were recorded and analyzed with a pseudo setting in two RCCs. Content analysis of the conversations between the client and professionals revealed the characteristics of the information exchanged in the assessment processes. A total of 760 assessment items were identified, thus indicating a broad array of interest. Despite the richness of information collected for the assessment, half of the assessment items did not have corresponding items in the documents that were employed during the prescription process. Thematic analysis of the interviews that followed revealed the common values and collaborative processes in ATD selection, which were shared and elaborated among the staff in daily social interactions. To facilitate implementation of ATD provision in various areas with few resources, it may be effective to convert this tacit-to-tacit knowledge sharing into a more explicit sharing by promoting analyses of good practices.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/ijerph18052697
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_33800131</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2501342687</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c484t-2be3c061ab2eda5f9cf89b6ef930183a33415ba232984976d1e2b9a3aa7107e83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhiMEoqVw5YgscUFCW_wVx74grRbKh4pYqcvZcpxJ16vEDnayqH-BX12HLauWEyePNc_7ambeonhJ8DljCr9zO4jDlkhcUqGqR8UpEQIvuMDk8b36pHiW0g5jJrlQT4sTxiTGhJHT4vcaYhrAjm4PCYUWfZu60TUuWTd0zpt4g9YxtJCSC950aAOmT6iZovPXaJlSbvTgxxmyMH9RGyJabj6gK-hm2-CR82jcAvpqBuMhAVpPdefsLNm72RZd3aQR-ufFk9Z0CV7cvWfFj4uPm9XnxeX3T19Wy8uF5ZKPC1oDs1gQU1NoTNkq20pVC2gVw0QywxgnZW0oo0pyVYmGAK2VYcZUBFcg2Vnx_uA7THUPjc3jR9PpIbo-r6uDcfphx7utvg57XSlRccaywZs7gxh-TpBG3ed7Qdfl9cKUNC2xLCtKRJXR1_-guzDFfMg_FGGcCjlT5wfKxpBShPY4DMF6jlk_jDkLXt1f4Yj_zTUD8gD8gjq0OUzwFo4YxlhQSZTiucJk5UYzB7UKkx-z9O3_S9ktspjIdg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2501342687</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Suzurikawa, Jun ; Sawada, Yuki ; Sakiyama, Miwa ; Suwa, Motoi ; Inoue, Takenobu ; Kondo, Tomoko</creator><creatorcontrib>Suzurikawa, Jun ; Sawada, Yuki ; Sakiyama, Miwa ; Suwa, Motoi ; Inoue, Takenobu ; Kondo, Tomoko</creatorcontrib><description>Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and a professional team. Under Japanese governmental ATD provision system, based on the application by clients, ATDs are mainly selected through collaborative processes with the clients and health professionals in public organizations, rehabilitation counseling centers (RCCs). By employing qualitative study methods in this study, we investigated the ATD selection process in which health professionals in RCCs collaboratively assess clients with physical disabilities so as to support them in selecting the adequate ATDs. To identify the perspectives required for ATD selection completely, the assessment processes were recorded and analyzed with a pseudo setting in two RCCs. Content analysis of the conversations between the client and professionals revealed the characteristics of the information exchanged in the assessment processes. A total of 760 assessment items were identified, thus indicating a broad array of interest. Despite the richness of information collected for the assessment, half of the assessment items did not have corresponding items in the documents that were employed during the prescription process. Thematic analysis of the interviews that followed revealed the common values and collaborative processes in ATD selection, which were shared and elaborated among the staff in daily social interactions. To facilitate implementation of ATD provision in various areas with few resources, it may be effective to convert this tacit-to-tacit knowledge sharing into a more explicit sharing by promoting analyses of good practices.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-7827</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18052697</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33800131</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>BASEL: Mdpi</publisher><subject>Adaptive technology ; Collaborative work ; Content analysis ; Cooperation ; Counseling ; Disabled Persons ; Environmental Sciences ; Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology ; Handicapped assistance devices ; Humans ; Investigations ; Japan ; Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine ; People with disabilities ; Professionals ; Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health ; Quality of Life ; Rehabilitation ; Science &amp; Technology ; Self-Help Devices ; Social factors ; Social interactions ; Teams ; User needs ; User services ; Workflow</subject><ispartof>International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021-03, Vol.18 (5), p.2697, Article 2697</ispartof><rights>2021. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 by the authors. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>1</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000628199400001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c484t-2be3c061ab2eda5f9cf89b6ef930183a33415ba232984976d1e2b9a3aa7107e83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c484t-2be3c061ab2eda5f9cf89b6ef930183a33415ba232984976d1e2b9a3aa7107e83</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8149-1742</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7967433/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7967433/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,39262,39263,53796,53798</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33800131$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Suzurikawa, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sawada, Yuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sakiyama, Miwa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suwa, Motoi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, Takenobu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kondo, Tomoko</creatorcontrib><title>Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System</title><title>International journal of environmental research and public health</title><addtitle>INT J ENV RES PUB HE</addtitle><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><description>Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and a professional team. Under Japanese governmental ATD provision system, based on the application by clients, ATDs are mainly selected through collaborative processes with the clients and health professionals in public organizations, rehabilitation counseling centers (RCCs). By employing qualitative study methods in this study, we investigated the ATD selection process in which health professionals in RCCs collaboratively assess clients with physical disabilities so as to support them in selecting the adequate ATDs. To identify the perspectives required for ATD selection completely, the assessment processes were recorded and analyzed with a pseudo setting in two RCCs. Content analysis of the conversations between the client and professionals revealed the characteristics of the information exchanged in the assessment processes. A total of 760 assessment items were identified, thus indicating a broad array of interest. Despite the richness of information collected for the assessment, half of the assessment items did not have corresponding items in the documents that were employed during the prescription process. Thematic analysis of the interviews that followed revealed the common values and collaborative processes in ATD selection, which were shared and elaborated among the staff in daily social interactions. To facilitate implementation of ATD provision in various areas with few resources, it may be effective to convert this tacit-to-tacit knowledge sharing into a more explicit sharing by promoting analyses of good practices.</description><subject>Adaptive technology</subject><subject>Collaborative work</subject><subject>Content analysis</subject><subject>Cooperation</subject><subject>Counseling</subject><subject>Disabled Persons</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology</subject><subject>Handicapped assistance devices</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigations</subject><subject>Japan</subject><subject>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</subject><subject>People with disabilities</subject><subject>Professionals</subject><subject>Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Science &amp; Technology</subject><subject>Self-Help Devices</subject><subject>Social factors</subject><subject>Social interactions</subject><subject>Teams</subject><subject>User needs</subject><subject>User services</subject><subject>Workflow</subject><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><issn>1660-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GIZIO</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhiMEoqVw5YgscUFCW_wVx74grRbKh4pYqcvZcpxJ16vEDnayqH-BX12HLauWEyePNc_7ambeonhJ8DljCr9zO4jDlkhcUqGqR8UpEQIvuMDk8b36pHiW0g5jJrlQT4sTxiTGhJHT4vcaYhrAjm4PCYUWfZu60TUuWTd0zpt4g9YxtJCSC950aAOmT6iZovPXaJlSbvTgxxmyMH9RGyJabj6gK-hm2-CR82jcAvpqBuMhAVpPdefsLNm72RZd3aQR-ufFk9Z0CV7cvWfFj4uPm9XnxeX3T19Wy8uF5ZKPC1oDs1gQU1NoTNkq20pVC2gVw0QywxgnZW0oo0pyVYmGAK2VYcZUBFcg2Vnx_uA7THUPjc3jR9PpIbo-r6uDcfphx7utvg57XSlRccaywZs7gxh-TpBG3ed7Qdfl9cKUNC2xLCtKRJXR1_-guzDFfMg_FGGcCjlT5wfKxpBShPY4DMF6jlk_jDkLXt1f4Yj_zTUD8gD8gjq0OUzwFo4YxlhQSZTiucJk5UYzB7UKkx-z9O3_S9ktspjIdg</recordid><startdate>20210308</startdate><enddate>20210308</enddate><creator>Suzurikawa, Jun</creator><creator>Sawada, Yuki</creator><creator>Sakiyama, Miwa</creator><creator>Suwa, Motoi</creator><creator>Inoue, Takenobu</creator><creator>Kondo, Tomoko</creator><general>Mdpi</general><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>17B</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>DVR</scope><scope>EGQ</scope><scope>GIZIO</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8149-1742</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210308</creationdate><title>Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System</title><author>Suzurikawa, Jun ; Sawada, Yuki ; Sakiyama, Miwa ; Suwa, Motoi ; Inoue, Takenobu ; Kondo, Tomoko</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c484t-2be3c061ab2eda5f9cf89b6ef930183a33415ba232984976d1e2b9a3aa7107e83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Adaptive technology</topic><topic>Collaborative work</topic><topic>Content analysis</topic><topic>Cooperation</topic><topic>Counseling</topic><topic>Disabled Persons</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology</topic><topic>Handicapped assistance devices</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigations</topic><topic>Japan</topic><topic>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</topic><topic>People with disabilities</topic><topic>Professionals</topic><topic>Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Science &amp; Technology</topic><topic>Self-Help Devices</topic><topic>Social factors</topic><topic>Social interactions</topic><topic>Teams</topic><topic>User needs</topic><topic>User services</topic><topic>Workflow</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Suzurikawa, Jun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sawada, Yuki</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sakiyama, Miwa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Suwa, Motoi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inoue, Takenobu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kondo, Tomoko</creatorcontrib><collection>Web of Knowledge</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Social Sciences Citation Index</collection><collection>Web of Science Primary (SCIE, SSCI &amp; AHCI)</collection><collection>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Suzurikawa, Jun</au><au>Sawada, Yuki</au><au>Sakiyama, Miwa</au><au>Suwa, Motoi</au><au>Inoue, Takenobu</au><au>Kondo, Tomoko</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System</atitle><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle><stitle>INT J ENV RES PUB HE</stitle><addtitle>Int J Environ Res Public Health</addtitle><date>2021-03-08</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>2697</spage><pages>2697-</pages><artnum>2697</artnum><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><eissn>1660-4601</eissn><abstract>Selection of assistive technology devices (ATDs), which are imperative for persons with disabilities to improve their quality of life, requires collaboration of users and multidisciplinary professionals. However, it is still unknown how to design and implement an adequate collaborative work flow and a professional team. Under Japanese governmental ATD provision system, based on the application by clients, ATDs are mainly selected through collaborative processes with the clients and health professionals in public organizations, rehabilitation counseling centers (RCCs). By employing qualitative study methods in this study, we investigated the ATD selection process in which health professionals in RCCs collaboratively assess clients with physical disabilities so as to support them in selecting the adequate ATDs. To identify the perspectives required for ATD selection completely, the assessment processes were recorded and analyzed with a pseudo setting in two RCCs. Content analysis of the conversations between the client and professionals revealed the characteristics of the information exchanged in the assessment processes. A total of 760 assessment items were identified, thus indicating a broad array of interest. Despite the richness of information collected for the assessment, half of the assessment items did not have corresponding items in the documents that were employed during the prescription process. Thematic analysis of the interviews that followed revealed the common values and collaborative processes in ATD selection, which were shared and elaborated among the staff in daily social interactions. To facilitate implementation of ATD provision in various areas with few resources, it may be effective to convert this tacit-to-tacit knowledge sharing into a more explicit sharing by promoting analyses of good practices.</abstract><cop>BASEL</cop><pub>Mdpi</pub><pmid>33800131</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijerph18052697</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8149-1742</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1660-4601
ispartof International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021-03, Vol.18 (5), p.2697, Article 2697
issn 1660-4601
1661-7827
1660-4601
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_33800131
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; PubMed Central; Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Adaptive technology
Collaborative work
Content analysis
Cooperation
Counseling
Disabled Persons
Environmental Sciences
Environmental Sciences & Ecology
Handicapped assistance devices
Humans
Investigations
Japan
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
People with disabilities
Professionals
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Quality of Life
Rehabilitation
Science & Technology
Self-Help Devices
Social factors
Social interactions
Teams
User needs
User services
Workflow
title Perspectives of Multidisciplinary Professional Teams during Assessment Processes for ATD Selection in the Japanese Public Provision System
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T02%3A51%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Perspectives%20of%20Multidisciplinary%20Professional%20Teams%20during%20Assessment%20Processes%20for%20ATD%20Selection%20in%20the%20Japanese%20Public%20Provision%20System&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20environmental%20research%20and%20public%20health&rft.au=Suzurikawa,%20Jun&rft.date=2021-03-08&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=2697&rft.pages=2697-&rft.artnum=2697&rft.issn=1660-4601&rft.eissn=1660-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijerph18052697&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2501342687%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2501342687&rft_id=info:pmid/33800131&rfr_iscdi=true