Exploring coaching and follow-up supports in community-implemented caregiver-mediated JASPER intervention
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Although a growing number of caregiver-mediated intervention models for families with children with autism are being examined in efficacy trials, few have been transferred to community implementation. Furthermore, little testing has explored implementation strategies to support caregivers’ strategy use with their children. In partnership with a publicly funded intervention agency in Canada, this pilot project explored intervention implementation strategies and follow-up supports. Dyads were randomized at entry to coaching or observe then add coaching and at intervention exit to individual or group follow-up booster. The caregiver-mediated Joint Attention, Symbolic Play, Engagement and Regulation intervention was provided by agency staff to a diverse community sample of families with young children awaiting or diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Independent agency staff delivered assessments and recorded a caregiver–child interaction. Blinded raters scored children’s initiations of joint attention, play actions, joint engagement, and caregivers’ strategy implementation. Practitioners implemented the intervention and coaching strategies well ( M = 83%). Overall, caregivers made significant gains in strategy use and children showed significant growth in joint engagement, play diversity, and joint attention across conditions through public caregiver-mediated intervention services. Caregivers’ strategy use supported gains in children’s joint engagement. Lay abstract The next step for communication interventions for young children with autism include coaching/teaching for caregivers that have been tested in university clinics and testing these interventions in real world systems with early intervention providers who serve children and families in their communities. However, there are few projects that have tested how well the intervention can be transferred to community providers and what types of progress children and caregivers make in these services. This project took place in partnership with a community early intervention agency in the province of Ontario, Canada. The agency provided government-funded public health services. The agency was funded to take part in a pilot program to try out one of four early intervention models that included coaching for caregivers and was designed to support children’s social engagement, play, and communication skills. The team decided to test two ways to start the intervention: (a) begin with observation of the practitioner for 4 weeks and then start coached practice with the child and (b) start coaching immediately. The team also tested two ways to support families for 3 months after intervention: (a) group booster sessions and (b) individual visits. The practitioners delivered the intervention well ( M = 83%), and overall, caregivers and children made significant gains by the end of intervention in both observation + coaching and coaching. Attendance for follow-up boosters was variable with fewer families attending groups. More research is needed to test different strategies and roles to individualize interventions for caregivers with a range of goals and learning styles.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle