Combining visual methods with focus groups: An innovative approach for capturing the multifaceted and complex work experiences of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder prevention specialists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Job, J., Poth, C., Pei, J., Wyper, K., Teresa, O., & Taylor, L. (2014). Combining visual methods with focus groups: An innovative approach for capturing the multifaceted and complex work experiences of Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder prevention specialists. The International Journal Of Alcohol And Drug Research, 3(1), 71-80. doi:10.7895/ijadr.v3i1.129Aims: This paper discusses the untapped potential of an innovative methodological approach for capturing the experiences of prevention specialists working with women at risk of drug and/or alcohol-exposed pregnancies and live births. Allowing frontline workers to express their personal and professional experiences through a creative activity enhanced our understanding of the difficult-to-measure programming outcomes of a provincial Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) strategy.Design: A multi-method design integrating focus groups with a quilting activity.Setting: Annual General Meeting of the Parent and Child Assistance Program (PCAP)—a prevention program for women at risk for drug and/or alcohol-exposed pregnancies and live births.Participants: Forty-seven FASD prevention specialists from across Alberta, Canada.Measurements: Triangulation across data sources: seven focus groups and 49 quilting pieces.Results: Thematic analysis revealed four themes: change as a process, client-advocate connection, ecological understanding, and evidence-based practice. The findings from this study contribute improved understanding about the significance of relationships, reflection, and research in the work of FASD prevention specialists.Conclusions: A multi-methods approach (focus groups with a quilting activity) provided an appropriate and trustworthy means of accessing the prevention specialists’ programmatic experience; that experience has the strong potential for informing future FASD policy, strategic planning, and programming.
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 | 0.051 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".