Examining the Preliminary Effectiveness and Acceptability of a Web-Based Training Program for Australian Secondary School Teachers: Pilot Study of the BEAM (Building Educators’ Skills in Adolescent Mental Health) Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Secondary schools are increasingly supporting adolescents' mental health and well-being, yet many teachers report that they lack the skills and confidence to do so. Building Educators' skills in Adolescent Mental Health (BEAM) is a web-based training program developed to improve secondary school teachers' knowledge and confidence in caring for students' mental health. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study examined the preliminary effectiveness and acceptability of the BEAM program for improving mental health knowledge, attitudes, confidence, helping behaviors, and psychological distress among secondary school teachers. METHODS: A single-arm pilot trial was conducted from July to December 2019 among secondary school teachers located in New South Wales, Australia, who were employed in leadership positions responsible for managing student well-being (ie, Year Advisors). Participants had access to the BEAM program for 6 weeks. Self-report surveys, delivered at baseline, postintervention (6-weeks post baseline) and 3-month follow-up (19 weeks post baseline) were used to measure changes in training outcomes. Acceptability was assessed by program use, barriers, satisfaction, and participants' perceptions of program effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 70 secondary school teachers took part (mean age 36.5 years, SD 9.41 years, range 24-60 years). Significant improvements in confidence were reported at postintervention and 3-month follow-up. Significant improvements in helping behaviors were reported at 3-month follow-up only. There was also a significant reduction in psychological distress at postintervention. Participants agreed that the program content was easy to understand and relevant, but program completion was challenged by lack of time, competing priorities, and forgetfulness. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicated that a web-based training program may be beneficial for improving secondary school teachers' abilities to care for students' mental health; however, program modifications are required to increase training completions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12619000821190, Universal Trial Number U1111-1232-7680; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=377529.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".