Effectiveness of Adaptation of a Resilience-Building Intervention Among Individuals With Adverse Childhood Experience: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) has been the focus of most studies for the past decade. There is an indication that developing resilience can help youth overcome these ACEs. OBJECTIVE: This article presents a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to investigate the effects of a resilience-building intervention on psychological well-being, coping strategies, stress, quality of life, resilience, resource finding, and resilience among individuals affected with ACEs in Malaysia. METHODS: The is a 2-armed, single-blind, RCT, whereby 50 participants (25 in each group) with ACEs will be randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. The former will be exposed to a resilience-building program (R2), which entails a multisystemic approach to resilience and recognizes the importance of rugged qualities and access to resources among individuals affected with ACEs. The intervention will be delivered via internet-based by a facilitator and broadly divided into 5 sessions, focusing on self-exploration and social support, coping techniques and coping skills, resource finding, spirituality, and resilience building. Meanwhile, the control group participants will not receive any form of intervention. Saliva samples will also be collected from both groups and assessed for salivary cortisol levels. Outcome measures will be assessed during baseline and postintervention using validated instruments. Another follow-up measurement will be conducted 4 weeks later. RESULTS: The clinical trial has been registered with the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Board at the National University of Malaysia (UKM PPI/111/8/JEP-2021-894). A total of 28 participants have been recruited to the RCT Participant recruitment will be completed by January 2025. The final analysis will be conducted by March 2025. CONCLUSIONS: This is among the first studies to provide evidence in the context of RCTs for resilience-building intervention that combines self-report and physiological measures (ie, saliva and heart blood pressure) among individuals with ACEs. The findings will assist relevant authorities in the health and policy sectors to develop effective strategies for addressing the negative impacts of ACEs on the vulnerable population in Malaysia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000604707; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Result/DataSharingStatement.aspx?id=383614. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/56826.
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 | 0.036 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.014 |
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".