MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Parents as transition experts? Qualitative findings from a pilot parent‐led peer support group

2011· article· en· W1481785200 on OpenAlexaff
Shauna Kingsnorth, Caroline Le Gall, S. Beayni, Patricia Rigby

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitatorFocus groupViewpointsPsychologyPeer supportQualitative researchExperiential knowledgeSocial supportMedical educationThematic analysisNursingDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This paper focuses on the introduction of parents as 'transition experts' within a paediatric rehabilitation hospital. Through the personal experience of raising a young adult with special healthcare needs, Family Facilitators are knowledgeable about the processes of social and healthcare service transfer and transition to adulthood. Following a needs assessment, a pilot transition support group was established for parents of youth who were eligible for augmentative communication support. The goal was to provide informational, emotional and affirmational support during this stressful period. This study examined the impact of the Family Facilitator-led Transition Peer Support Group on parents' knowledge, skill and level of support in planning for the future. METHODS: Qualitative methods were used to explore benefits, limitations and outcomes of the parent support group. In addition to a review of 10 narrative field notes maintained for each session by the Family Facilitator and four session feedback forms, a 90-min focus group was conducted with eight core members. RESULTS: Qualitative examination of the data revealed three themes: (i) increased awareness related to personal challenges in planning and shifting viewpoints on future orientation; (ii) increased active planning with regard to knowledge building and actions taken; and (iii) the value of experiential knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Parents reported gaining new knowledge and became more active and future-oriented in their planning. Further, they strongly valued the facilitator role and benefited from the social support provided by the group. Findings provide a unique snapshot of parental needs. Individualized support with an emphasis on citizenship, participation and inclusion were targeted topics. Future work should continue to explore optimal mechanisms for the provision of parent-focused transition support and the inclusion of parents as experts within healthcare settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations100
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207