Effectiveness of an Occupational Therapy-Led Social Skills Group Using Parent Training: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Social skills support the development of a positive self-concept and engagement in a variety of life roles, habits, and routines. The Occupational Therapy Practice Framework clearly defines the occupational therapist’s role in working with children with difficulties in social skills; however, little research exists examining the effectiveness of occupational therapy-led group interventions to support social skills development. Incorporating parent training into social skill development can improve overall outcomes and reinforce skill development across contexts. Objective: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine whether an occupational therapy-led social skill group, combined with parent training, was effective in improving social skill outcomes in children with parent-reported social skill delays. Method: Occupational therapists developed collaborative social goals and implemented a social skills group intervention with eight school-aged children presenting with parent-reported social skill delays. In addition, occupational therapists provided parent training to support onsite interventions. Pretest and posttest data was collected and analyzed. Results: The results of this pilot study indicate that 8/8 children demonstrated progress in social skills on outcome measures including the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and Goal Attainment Scaling. Conclusion: This pilot study supports the premise that occupational therapy-led social skills intervention groups, combined with parent training, are effective in promoting social skills. Occupational therapists and occupational therapy assistants have a clear role in designing and implementing group interventions to support social skill development.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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, 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".