Building Circles of Support, an Education Series About Children and Adolescents with Prenatal Alcohol Exposure: A Preliminary Program Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to learn if participating in an education series about Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), the Building Circles of Support (BCS) series, changes participants’ (1) understanding of FASD, (2) understanding of child behavior, and (3) thoughts about themselves as caregivers. It also investigated participants’ impressions of the program. Participants were recruited across three consecutive BCS series. Participants were eligible for the study by attending at least one BCS session. Six caregivers and eight supporters of children with FASD and prenatal alcohol exposure (PAE) were recruited. Data were collected before and after the series. Participants reported enjoying and learning from the series. They suggested additional sessions on strategies, sleep, community resources, and time for connecting as attendees be included in future BCS series. There was not enough information to determine if caregivers’ understanding of child behavior and thoughts about themselves as caregivers changed after the series; however, there were promising results to indicate an improvement in a caregiver’s sense of competency post-series. This study highlighted that caregivers and supporters value an educational series about PAE and FASD, which may lead to improved caregiving. It also uncovered insights that can be used to improve the BCS series and future research studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".