MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Role of Psychological and Pedagogical Training of Educators in Establishing Effective Communication with Veterans with Intellectual Disabilities

2025· article· en· W4414292942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Diana Sabol, Kostiantyn Lynov, Олександр Васильович Кочерга, O Khomenko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and Treatment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Education and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessTraining (meteorology)PerceptionQuality (philosophy)Professional developmentCognitionIntellectual disability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The psychological and pedagogical training of teachers to interact with veterans with signs of intellectual disabilities was identified as a critical factor in post-war social integration. The study aimed to assess the influence of educator preparedness on the quality of communication with veterans in adaptive educational settings. A mixed-methods approach was applied, including surveys, content analysis, pedagogical observations, and correlation analysis. The findings indicated a mismatch between the self-assessed readiness of teachers and veterans' perception of their interactions. A positive relationship was established between educator preparedness and the satisfaction level of veterans. The study contributed to the understanding of how targeted professional training may enhance communication outcomes in education involving vulnerable adult learners. Conclusions pointed to the need for modular training programs tailored to the specific needs of learners with post-traumatic cognitive features.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability - Diagnosis and TreatmentSame topicDisability Education and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207