Family‐centred service coordination in childhood health and disability services: the search for meaningful service outcome measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Potential service outcome measures were tested for their utility in the assessment of the quality of 'family centred' service coordination in the provincial network of children's disability services in Manitoba, Canada. METHODS: This study is based on in-home survey data provided by 103 mothers at 6 and 18 months following assignment of a 'dedicated' service coordinator. Service outcome indicators included measures of parent self-esteem, parenting stress, family functioning and the need for family support resources. RESULTS: Hierarchical regression analyses showed no relationship between level of quality of family-centred service coordination and standardized psychosocial measures of parent and family functioning. However, family centredness of service coordination was found to predict significant reduction in level of family need for psychosocial support resources after 18 months of contact with a service coordinator. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome measures that are focused on specific and tangible results of service coordination appear to be of higher utility in service quality assessment than are more global, standardized measures of parent and family functioning.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".