Evaluating the parent–adolescent communication toolkit: Usability and preliminary content effectiveness of an online intervention
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
Abstract Aim This study aimed to assess the Parent–Adolescent Communication Toolkit, an online intervention designed to help improve parent communication with their adolescents. Participant preferences for two module delivery systems (sequential and unrestricted module access) were identified. Design Usability assessment of the PACT intervention was completed using pre‐test and posttest comparisons. Usability data, including participant completion and satisfaction ratings were examined. Methods Parents ( N = 18) of adolescents were randomized to a sequential or unrestricted chapter access group. Parent participants completed pre‐test measures, the PACT intervention and posttest measures. Participants provided feedback for the intervention to improve modules and provided usability ratings. Adolescent pre‐ and posttest ratings were evaluated. Results Usability ratings were high and parent feedback was positive. The sequential module access groups rated the intervention content higher and completed more content than the unrestricted chapter access group, indicating support for the sequential access design. Parent mean posttest communication scores were significantly higher ( p < .05) than pre‐test scores. No significant differences were detected for adolescent participants. Findings suggest that the Parent–Adolescent Communication Toolkit has potential to improve parent–adolescent communication but further effectiveness assessment is required.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 it