MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280644881 · doi:10.1177/15394492221083664

Effects of Telehealth Parent Coaching in Supporting Family Participation, Cohesion, and Adaptability

2022· article· en· W4280644881 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah L. Smith, Semra Aytur, Betsy P. Humphreys

Bibliographic record

VenueOTJR Occupational Therapy Journal of Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptabilityCoachingTelehealthCohesion (chemistry)PsychologyFamily systemsBusinessDevelopmental psychologyPsychotherapistEconomic growthEconomicsTelemedicineManagementChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Families provide foundational contexts in which most children develop and grow. For families of children with special health care needs (CSHCN), interdisciplinary supports can build family participation capacities, beyond individualistic child supports. This single-group pretest–posttest quasi-experimental study sought to determine the preliminary effects of the Healthy Families Flourish Program (HFFP), a telehealth occupation-based parent coaching intervention to promote participation, cohesion, adaptability, and communication for families of CSHCN. Eleven families, including 17 parents and 27 children, completed the 10-session intervention consisting of parent education and individualized coaching. Participants completed the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, Goal Attainment Scaling, and the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales pre-/post-intervention. Within-group comparisons showed improvements in family participation, cohesion, adaptability, and communication with Cohen’s d effect sizes ranging from 0.55-3.32. Researchers found positive relationships between family participation and cohesion as well as participation and adaptability. Findings provide considerations for supporting families within socioecological 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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.213
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.305 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTJR Occupational Therapy Journal of ResearchSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207