Motives and Motivations for Peer Mentors of Caregivers with Children who have Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) refers to a spectrum of neurodevelopmental conditions that significantly impact an individual's physical appearance, learning, and behaviour. A consistent caregiver and home life are known to reduce the occurrence or severity of adverse outcomes. Peer mentors can be important sources of support to caregivers with children who have FASD. The purpose of this study was to identify the motives1 and motivations2 of peer mentors to caregivers of children and youth with FASD. Ten mentors with lived experience raising a dependent with FASD participated in in-person or telephone interviews that included the focal question: "Why do you want to be a peer mentor?" Responses were analyzed with a qualitative content analysis procedure. Four themes were generated from the responses. Mentors wanted to provide emotional support as a means of improving mentee wellbeing through therapeutic means and relationship development. They wanted to share lived experience as a means of educating mentees through the provision of personal knowledge, strategies, and skills. Mentors also chose to become involved for personal or mutual benefit, including fulfilling a call to give back or for personal growth and development. Finally, mentors participated to alter the perceptions and expectations held by mentees regarding caring for a child with FASD by sharing personal values and opinion statements. The themes were compared and contrasted with existing literature.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".