Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder service delivery: Exploring current systems of care from the caregivers’ perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Walls, L., & Pei, J. (2013). Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder service delivery: Exploring current systems of care from the caregivers’ perspective. The International Journal Of Alcohol And Drug Research, 2(3), 87-92. doi:10.7895/ijadr.v2i3.75 (http://dx.doi.org/10.7895/ijadr.v2i3.75)Aims: The goals of this study were to: (1) gain improved understanding of the needs of caregivers caring for individuals with FASD; (2) gain improved understanding of the experiences of these caregivers as they attempt to access and implement supports in daily functioning; and (3) gain improved understanding of caregivers’ perceptions of strengths and challenges in systems of care for individuals with FASD.Design: Information for this study was gathered using a phenomenological in-depth interviewing method, allowing the researchers to explore existing services, policies, and local knowledge from the perspective of the caregivers who were accessing services. Participants: A total of eight participants (N = 8) met the criteria for participation. Six of the participants in the study were adoptive parents and two were foster parents. Of the eight participants, seven were female and one was male. Three of the study participants resided in rural locations and five in urban centers. Findings: Results indicated that caregivers pass through four stages of caregiving, with each stage having a distinct primary need and requiring supports and services that best address that need. Three additional themes related to service delivery also emerged: caregiver considerations, program factors, and building on strengths. Conclusions: Study results emphasize the need for further research exploring the concept that caregivers experience specific caregiving stages, and that programming factors should align with caregivers’ needs in each of these stages. Participants’ narratives also suggest that the results of this study may be relevant beyond its regional specificity and limited sample size, and may in fact reflect the experiences of caregivers across jurisdictions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".