Examination of Coaching Behaviors Used by Providers When Delivering Early Intervention via Telehealth to Families of Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) states that infants and toddlers with disabilities, and their family members, are to receive family-centered early intervention (FCEI). This study investigated providers' use of FCEI strategies when intervention was delivered to young children who were deaf or hard of hearing via telehealth. Telehealth is the use of telecommunication technologies to provide health services to people who are located at some distance from a provider. Telehealth also offers access to specialists and eliminates barriers of geography and weather. This study examined the frequency of occurrence of desired FCEI provider behaviors during telehealth sessions and contrasted them with the same behaviors used during in-person therapy. The use of FCEI provider behaviors was measured by observing and coding digitally recorded intervention sessions. Results demonstrated that selected FCEI provider behaviors occur in the telehealth condition more frequently than in the in-person condition reported in the literature. Three of the provider behaviors studied (i.e., observation, parent practice with feedback, and child behavior with provider feedback) were used more frequently in the telehealth condition. Direct instruction was used in similar amounts in both treatment conditions. This study affirms that the use of FCEI strategies may be enhanced through telehealth.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".