Mentors' perceptions of an ongoing health promotion program for adolescent girls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Go Girls! is a group-based healthy lifestyle program that targets health behaviours among adolescent girls through weekly mentoring sessions led by young women (M ± SD age 24 ± 2.35 years). The aim of this study was to investigate mentors’ perceptions of both program processes and characteristics as well as changes in the adolescent girls’ behaviours and cognitions as a result of participation in the program. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine Go Girls! mentors. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Meaning units (MU) were independently coded by the first two authors. Seven themes inductively emerged from the mentor interviews with descriptive categories (C) within each: 1) Positive Program Perceptions (C=6); 2) Mentor Perception of the Girls (C=5); 3) Characteristics of Mentorship (C=5); 4) Perceptions of the Program Mandate (C=3); 5) Experience with the Program (C=3); 6) Challenges in Program Delivery (C=3); and 7) Suggested Program Adaptations (C=2). There were four commonly mentioned categories (i.e., all nine mentors contributed MUs): General Praise and Enjoyment of the Program (MU= 99), Changes in the Girls After the Program (MU=118), Roles Associated with Mentorship (MU= 98) and Responsibilities Associated with Mentorship (MU= 49) which aligned with the themes of Positive Program Perceptions, Mentor Perception of Girls, and Characteristics of Mentorship, respectively. Seven mentors contributed to the category of Short Duration (MU=34) within the theme of Challenges in Delivery, and four mentors suggested to Increase the Duration of the Program (MU= 24) within the theme of Suggested Program Adaptations. Findings from this study provide preliminary support for the feasibility and enjoyment of delivering the Go Girls! program as well as observations of program effectiveness and potential areas of improvement.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".