Social problem solving and social performance after a group social skills intervention for childhood brain tumor survivors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the ability of a group social skills intervention program for childhood brain tumor survivors to effect two steps of the social information processing model: social problem solving and social performance. METHODS: Participants were 15 survivors (eight men and seven women) aged 7-15 years. The intervention consisted of eight 2-h weekly sessions focused on social skills including friendship making. Social problem solving, using hypothetical scenarios, was assessed during sessions 1 and 8. Social performance was observed during intervention sessions 1, 4, and 8. RESULTS: Compared with session 1, significant increases were found in social performance: frequency of maintaining eye contact and social conversations with peers over the course of the intervention. No significant changes in social problem solving were noted. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study is the first to report improvements related to group social skills intervention at the level of observed social performance over the course of intervention. The lack of change in social problem solving suggests that survivors may possess the social knowledge required for social situations but have difficulty enacting social behaviors.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it