MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7067770140

Non-Biological Caregiversâ Experiences of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) Support Groups

2009· article· en· W7067770140 sur OpenAlexfundno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineComputer Science
ThématiqueArtificial Intelligence in Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Mots-clésCognitive reframingFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderFocus groupPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Qualitative researchSocial supportSupport groupPrenatal alcohol exposureResource (disambiguation)
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Caregivers of children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) are an extremely valuable resource, and supporting a stable and nurturing home environment may be the most achievable intervention to improve the child’s prognosis. Very little research has been done to explore effective interventions that focus on the FASD caregiver, rather than the child, for the purposes of preventing caregiver burnout and placement breakdown. The central purpose of this study is to explore non-biological parent caregivers’ experiences of FASD caregiver support groups in order to capture a better understanding of the value of this resource as one part of a continuum of care for families affected by prenatal alcohol exposure. In addition, useful data is gathered and presented concerning participants’ overall experiences as an FASD caregiver, adaptive attitudes that appear to promote wellness among caregivers, and participants’ views concerning needed resources in addition to support groups.\nTo accomplish this goal, semi-structured interviews were completed with seven non-biological parent FASD caregivers who were attending a variety of different FASD support groups. Qualitative analysis was employed to identify important themes and draw conclusions. This study revealed that support groups are generally beneficial to non-biological caregivers, although not always in the ways anticipated prior to group attendance. Support groups were particularly helpful in their ability to reduce caregiver isolation by offering a non-judgmental forum where caregivers meet with peers who become invested in seeing their families succeed, where there struggles and emotions are normalized, and where they receive mentorship, education, advocacy, practical tools, and support in reframing problem behaviours as symptoms of their child’s disability. Certain elements of group structure were associated with more positive evaluations of support group usefulness, including monthly meetings led by a skilled group leader who was also a fellow FASD caregiver, having the group divided according to ages of the children, and having a consistent structure and routine that ensured that all caregivers’ needs could be attended to at each meeting. Participants saw online forums for support among group members in between meetings as a valuable tool and found one-to-one mentorship outside of the group during crisis points to be particularly helpful.\nAlthough participants spoke very positively about the beneficial impact of the support groups, overall, they also talked about some of the potential negative impacts of groups. This included hearing horror stories that created fear for their own futures, and a variety of issues related to unhealthy group process and leadership issues. Although the intent of this study is not to establish a “gold standard” for caregiver support groups, it provides a helpful framework for group leaders to assess areas for growth and change in their support groups and to highlight the potentially hurtful or damaging aspects of group participation.

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.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,435
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,002
Science ouverte0,0020,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,255
Écart entre enseignants0,231 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)Même sujetArtificial Intelligence in EducationTravaux en français237 207