The implementation and effect of trauma-informed care within residential youth services in rural Canada: A mixed methods case study.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The prevalence and associated risks of trauma have led youth-serving institutions to adopt trauma-informed care (TIC). A limited research base has linked TIC with improved outcomes. Associations between TIC and vicarious traumatization (VT) are even less commonly studied. The purpose of this case study is to evaluate the implementation and effect of TIC within 1 residential youth services division in rural Canada using the curriculum-based Risking Connection (RC; Saakvitne et al., 2001) and Restorative Approach (RA; Wilcox, 2012) trauma training programs, with a focus on VT. METHOD: We used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design and a participatory action research approach to evaluate the implementation and effect of RC and RA. Study 1, the quantitative program evaluation, used a prepost design to evaluate the effect of RC and RA on staff. Study 2, the qualitative study, used participant observations and interviews to develop a deeper understanding the quantitative findings. RESULTS: This study replicated previous findings that RC improves attitudes favorable to TIC but found that staff experience of VT increased after TIC training. Qualitative findings suggested that the division was successfully implementing TIC and that increased awareness and discussion of VT were potentially responsible for increases in VT scores. CONCLUSIONS: This case study documents improvements in staff attitudes favorable to TIC post-RC and RA and presents an in-depth analysis of TIC implementation. The study also highlights the complicated relationship between TIC implementation and staff experience of VT. Finally, this study provides a blueprint for conducting program evaluations of TIC. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).
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.
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 | 0.010 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it