Strengthening the social relationships of mothers with learning difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accessible summary Many mothers with learning difficulties want help with meeting people and making friends, and ‘getting out and about’ in their community. We worked with mothers with learning difficulties and family support workers to create a programme, the ASLP, to help mothers achieve their goals to get out and about in the community. This programme involves mothers meeting, talking and learning together over a 12‐week period. Mothers also receive one to one support to work on their individual goals. We tested the programme with 32 mothers and most mothers achieved their goals and now feel better about themselves and more confident about being in the community. This programme is now available for other service workers to use to support mothers with learning difficulties in their communities. Summary Mothers with learning difficulties are often isolated within their local communities. They also report low levels of social support. Social disconnection is associated with high levels of stress and poorer mental health, and in turn, adverse parenting and child outcomes. In the study reported here, a multi‐site, intervention group only, repeated measures research design was employed to determine the efficacy of a group‐based, adult‐learning programme designed to strengthen the social relationships and improve the psychological wellbeing of mothers with learning difficulties. Thirty‐two mothers with learning difficulties completed the programme across six sites in Australia. The effects of the programme on perceived social support and psychological wellbeing were substantially greater than established benchmarks for parent‐training and family support programmes. These promising findings warrant further investigation, ideally employing a randomised‐controlled trial design.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".