Investigating a Participation-Based Friendship Intervention for Youth with Disabilities: Effects on Goal Attainment, Social Self-Efficacy, and Engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: This preliminary study examined the effects of a participation-based friendship intervention for youth with physical and developmental disabilities on their goal attainment, social self-efficacy, and engagement in program sessions.Methods: Before and after the eight-session intervention, five youth with physical and developmental disabilities ages 15–20 (3 females) completed a measure of goal attainment scaling (GAS) and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) for goals related to friendship, along with a measure of social self-efficacy. Engagement was assessed after every second session (i.e. four times). After the program, youth completed interviews to capture their perceptions of each of these variables. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively, enriched with the qualitative data.Results: Overall, youth achieved their GAS goals and demonstrated clinically significant change in mean COPM performance and satisfaction. Three youth displayed clinically significant change in social self-efficacy. Engagement in the program was high, with the majority of participants reporting slightly increasing levels of engagement over the sessions. The interviews substantiated these quantitative changes.Conclusions: There are few evidence-informed friendship interventions for youth with disabilities. This study provides initial evidence for the effectiveness of a participation-based friendship intervention incorporating coaching and focusing on real-world goals and contexts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".