Measuring the Effectiveness of the Connect Parent Group Within CAAMHPP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY BACKGROUND: The Connect Parent Group (CPG) is an attachment-based, trauma informed, psychoeducational supportive group for parents of preteens (ages 8 to 12) and teens (ages 13 to 17) that was adopted by the Child and Adolescent Addiction Mental Health Psychiatry Program (CAAMHPP) in Alberta in 2008. Although evaluated by its developers in British Columbia, the effectiveness of implementation had not been evaluated in Alberta. PURPOSE: This quality assurance study assessed the effectiveness of the CPG on the relationship quality between the treated parents and the youth, identified the clinical characteristics of youth with and without CPG participating parents, and justified the need for further CPG services in CAAMHPP. METHODS: Pre-and-post CPG parent self-reports were assessed using the Parenting Relationship Questionnaire (PRQ) over a 3-year period. The clinical severity of youth with participating and non-participating parents was compared based on standardized clinical screening and outcome measurement instruments, as well as the referral rates for CPG exposed and unexposed youth. The need for further services was examined based on repeated referrals of the youth before and after parental exposure to CPG, in comparison to the base rate of repeat referrals of youth from non-participating families over the same 6-year time period. RESULTS: Youth with CPG-exposed parents had greater clinical severity pre-exposure and lower severity post-exposure compared to youth of non-exposed parents. CPG parents post-exposure reported improvement on items of the PRQ measures. Post-exposure, the youth with CPG-exposed parents had a 61% decrease in referrals to further mental health services. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the application of the CPG within clinical settings. The CPG-exposed parent-child relationship improvement reported in the PRQ appeared to be validated in that CPG-exposed youth were both distinct in clinical severity of mental health issues on presentation and had greater improvement on discharge with less readmission to mental health services.
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 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".