Patterns of Change in Restraints, Seclusions and Time-outs over the Implementation of Trauma-informed Staff Training Programs in Residential Care for Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trauma-informed care (TIC) is receiving growing interest and support as a promising approach to reducing the use of restrictive measures (restraints, seclusions and time-outs) in children and youth living in residential care. In this study, we aimed to compare the use of restrictive measures prior to and following the implementation of a TIC staff training initiative in 44 residential units for children and youth and to explore differences between units and type of measures used. Patterns of change in monthly use of restrictive measures 6 months before and 12 months after the training were compared using growth curve models. Restraints, seclusions and time-outs decreased by 41.82%, 19.91%, and 48.15%, respectively, over a year following the training. Despite these important declines, trajectories of restrictive measures did not change significantly from pre- to post-training when holding the TIC training against stringent criteria. Nonetheless, some units’ characteristics were associated with successful changes. Results are promising, but not conclusive about the ability of this TIC training to produce changes in trajectories of restrictive measures, at least in the first year of implementation. This study highlights the need for rigorous statistical models in further studies to ensure accurate empirical evaluation of TIC staff training programs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".