Testing the effectiveness of a mentoring intervention to improve social participation of adolescents with visual impairments: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social participation is challenging for people with visual impairments. As a result, on average, social networks are smaller, romantic relationships formed later, educational achievements lower, and career prospects limited. Adolescents on their way towards achieving these goals may benefit from the knowledge and experience of adults who have overcome similar difficulties. Therefore, a mentoring intervention, called Mentor Support, will be set up and studied in which adolescents with visual impairments are matched with successfully social participating adults with and without visual impairments. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Mentor Support. Secondary aims are to distinguish the importance of the disability-specific experience of mentors, predictors of success, and mediating factors. METHODS/DESIGN: The effect of Mentor Support will be tested in a randomized clinical trial, using pre-test one week before starting, post-test after 12 months, and follow-up after 18 months. Participants will be referred to one of the experimental groups or the control group, and this randomization will be stratified according to country region. Three groups are included in the trial: 40 participants will receive Mentor Support by mentors with a visual impairment in combination with care-as-usual, 40 participants will receive Mentor Support by mentors without visual impairments in combination with care-as-usual, and 40 participants will receive care-as-usual only. Mentor Support consists of 12 face-to-face meetings of the mentee with a mentor with an overall time period of one year. On a weekly basis, dyads have contact via email, the Internet, or telephone. The primary outcome measure is improved social participation within three domains (work/school, leisure activities, and social relationships). Mediator variables are psychosocial functioning and self-determination. Predictors such as demographics and personality are also investigated in order to distinguish the pathways to successful social participation. Intention-to-treat and completer analyses will be conducted. DISCUSSION: The primary outcomes of this trial regard increased social participation. The study may yield insights to further improve effects of support programs to adolescents with visual impairments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register NTR4768 (registered 4 September 2014).
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 | 0.037 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.009 |
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".