The feasibility of an adapted virtual mindfulness intervention for Special Olympics athletes and their caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Virtual mindfulness may be helpful for individuals with intellectual disabilities in the context of COVID-related disruptions of in-person programming, such as Special Olympics (SO). This study examined the feasibility of a virtual mindfulness intervention for SO athletes and their caregivers. METHOD: SO athletes (n = 44) and their caregivers (n = 29) participated in a 6-week adapted virtual mindfulness intervention. Athletes completed mindfulness and well-being questionnaires prior to, immediately following, and 3-months post-intervention. Caregivers completed questionnaires assessing their own stress, mindfulness, and well-being, as well as athlete mental health. Exit interviews were conducted immediately following the intervention. RESULTS: The intervention was feasible in terms of demand, implementation, acceptability, and limited testing efficacy. There were significant improvements in athlete well-being and mental health, and caregiver stress and mindfulness post-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Adapted virtual mindfulness groups may be an effective intervention in improving the well-being of adults with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".