Assessing the Fidelity of Supported Education Programs for First-Episode Psychosis To the Supported Employment Guidelines Adapted for Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. Psychotic disorders are associated with academic difficulties. Supported Employment Program (SEP) guidelines have become the gold standard to improve occupational functioning in psychotic disorders. More recently, these guidelines have been adapted to education. In Canada, several community organizations and hospital programs offer supported education to young people with psychotic disorders. However, SEP guidelines are not systematically used. The objective of this study was to assess the fidelity of 6 Canadian (Quebec) organizations offering supported education services to young people with psychotic disorders to the SEP guidelines adapted to education. Methods. Six sites offering educational services to young people with psychotic disorders were recruited. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with one supported education professional and one manager of each site, using the Quality of Supported Education Implementation Scale (QSEDIS). This new scale has been developed from the Quality of Supported Employment Implementation Scale. The QSEDIS assesses the fidelity of the quality of the implementation of supported education programs, using three subscales (Employees, Organization and Services). Results. Acceptable fidelity scores were observed in the three QSEDIS subscales for all six sites combined. The Services subscale received the highest score of fidelity (4.4./5), followed by the Supported Education Employee (4.1/5) and the Organization (3.7/5). Conclusion. The results suggest that supported education services offered to young people with psychotic disorders in the six sites are generally consistent with SEP guidelines adapted to education. Further research is warranted to validate whether acceptable SEP guidelines fidelity according to the QSEDIS translates into educational outcomes.
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 | 0.015 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".