MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411388417 · doi:10.1111/jar.70058

Virtual Acceptance and Commitment Training to Promote Wellbeing of Staff Supporting Adults With Intellectual Disabilities: A Feasibility Study

2025· article· en· W4411388417 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kendra Thomson, Sarah Davis, Sarah Ludmilla Bernier, Carly Magnacca, Steve Noone, Yona Lunsky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityBrock UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersAzrieli Foundation
KeywordsPsychological interventionAcceptance and commitment therapyFlexibility (engineering)Promotion (chess)PsychologyAnxietyIntervention (counseling)Adaptation (eye)Intellectual disabilityApplied psychologyNursingMedical educationMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Staff supporting people with intellectual disabilities may experience work-related stress that adversely impacts their wellbeing and capacity to provide support. Acceptance and Commitment Training interventions like Promotion of Acceptance in Carers and Teachers (PACT) have been shown to be effective for reducing stress and promoting psychological flexibility in direct staff in the United Kingdom. AIMS: We evaluated the feasibility of a virtual adaptation of PACT for staff in Canada. METHODS: Within a single-arm feasibility trial, we assessed five categories of feasibility: acceptability, demand, implementation, adaptation and limited efficacy testing. Between 2021 and 2023, 149 staff consented to participate and 81 completed all measures. RESULTS: The intervention was a feasible and acceptable method of supporting staff wellbeing with promising outcomes in terms of improved psychological flexibility and decreased stress, anxiety and depression. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Future research should explore the benefits of this intervention relative to other staff wellbeing interventions in randomised controlled trials.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.103
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Research in Intellectual DisabilitiesSame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207