MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989713598 · doi:10.1111/cch.12726

Online peer mentorship programmes for children and adolescents with neurodevelopmental disabilities: A systematic review

2019· review· en· W2989713598 on OpenAlexaff
Shikha Saxena, Jacob R. Mitchell, Annahita Ehsan, Annette Majnemer, Keiko Shikako‐Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipCINAHLPsychological interventionThematic analysisAutism spectrum disorderPsycINFOPsychologyCerebral palsyIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyAutismAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderPeer supportMEDLINEDevelopmental psychologyMedicineQualitative researchMedical educationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with neurodevelopmental disabilities may be less well integrated into their community than their peers. Online groups can be particularly accessible for individuals with neurodevelopmental disabilities, as individuals may be able to connect with a larger network than they would in their local community. This systematic review aimed at estimating the effectiveness of online peer mentorship programmes on children and adolescent's participation in life situations. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted to search Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and Education Research Complete (ERIC) electronic databases. Thematic analysis was done for studies that used qualitative methodology. RESULTS: Eleven articles were included, and they examined the influences of five different structured online peer mentorship intervention programmes and six different online support groups. The disabilities included cerebral palsy (n = 3), autism spectrum disorder (n = 3), spina bifida (n = 2), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (n = 2), and other neurodevelopmental disorders. The mentors included in the studies were caregivers of children with disabilities, youth and adults with disabilities, and a virtual peer actor. The mentees included in the studies were youth with disabilities (age 10-19 years) and their families. Intervention characteristics varied across the studies but consistently showed a unique potential to facilitate social networking and support. Intervention programmes with specific content and structure showed better participation outcomes than unstructured interventions. Presence of a moderator and participant characteristics (age and sociocultural background) was suggested to influence the outcomes of interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Online peer mentorship programmes appear to have positive influence on social engagement and participation in life situation for children and adolescents with disabilities. This paper discusses several areas that should be considered in future research studies to improve potential effectiveness and use of study designs that help to establish not only if interventions work but also for whom they work best and why.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.062
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care Health and DevelopmentSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207