Evaluation of a sandplay program for preschoolers in a multiethnic neighborhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This evaluative study assesses the efficacy of a school-based secondary prevention program consisting of creative expression workshops for immigrant and refugee preschoolers in a predominantly South Asian multiethnic neighborhood. Coincidentally, the program began in the wake of the tsunami. METHOD: Pretest and posttest data were collected from the parents and teachers of 105 preschoolers in 10 classes randomly assigned to an experimental or control status. The parents' and teachers' versions of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire were used to assess the children's mental health. The family's ethnic origins and premigration experiences of organized violence were considered in the analysis. RESULTS: According to both the teachers' and parents' reports, the children in the experimental group benefited moderately from the program, which appeared to reduce the SDQ global score of children whose families had experienced violence in their homelands (t(21) = 3.83, p = .001 (MT(1) = 12.81, MT(2) = 9.59)), in particular those from South Asia. CONCLUSION: This study provides some evidence that immigrant preschoolers whose families have experienced adversity before migration can benefit from the creative expression workshops. Further studies are needed to determine if this program can help address the effects of mass media exposure to a disaster or traumatic event on vulnerable communities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".