MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7000625718

Fostering FASD-Informed Practice with Incarcerated Adults with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder: Towards More Informed, Strengths-Based, Investigative and Connected Correctional Environments

2024· dissertation· en· W7000625718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilStrong
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Fetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderDelphi methodWork (physics)Best practiceFetal alcoholService (business)Focus group
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The capacity to foster an FASD-informed environment is predicated on the ability of those within the said environment to make their own practice and interactions FASD-informed. The aim of this study was to critically consider how Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD)-informed practice could be fostered within Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) facilities. The study aimed to identify, first, the receptiveness of CSC staff towards adopting FASD-informed practices, and second, the essential elements of an FASD-informed environment and whether they could be applied to a correctional environment. To do so, the researcher carried out the research using a three-part, mixed-methods design that combined a traditional survey, an open-ended survey with a modified Delphi approach follow-up, and interviews with three separate professional groups. The groups included CSC frontline staff, professionals working within intervention and research for FASD, and CSC staff who work within an institution that also houses an FASD diagnostic clinic. The results indicated that FASD-informed environments employ practices and people who (a) are informed about the disorder, (b) are willing to employ strengths-based approaches, (c) are relentlessly investigative in their pursuit to help the individuals they work with find success, and (d) value the role of connection and relationships. \nWithin CSC, many staff reported being receptive to adjusting their approach when working with individuals with FASD; however, promoting widespread FASD-informed attitudes and approaches will require changes to current practice, necessitating further training and exposure. Mainstreaming FASD training requires an understanding that not all staff need the same level of FASD knowledge. A tiered implementation model (foundation, knowledge base, action, and specialized service) is offered as a guide to fostering FASD-informed correctional environments. At a foundational level, working towards all institutions being trauma-informed, person-centered, and strengths-based will be beneficial to all incarcerated individuals, not only those with FASD. This can be fostered by offering regular, multimodal training to all staff and fostering attitudes that promote interdisciplinary teamwork and safety. For those in specialized environments or disciplines, offering domain and discipline-specific intervention strategies and opportunities to practice them is suggested. Continued support of the FASD Diagnostic Clinic teams will also ensure continued diagnostic capacity, consultation, and specialized services. All four tiers in the tiered implementation model rely on strong managerial support and are strengthened through connections within the institution and the surrounding community. The implication of the findings within this study offers recommendations on how to respond to FASD within correctional systems that is consistent with CSC’s mandate to provide treatment aimed at rehabilitation and mitigating the risk offenders place on the safety of society. Given the overrepresentation of FASD within institutions, there is a need to provide employees with tools to work with this population and be responsive to these mandates. With top-level support to introduce sustainable training opportunities alongside recognizing that FASD requires frontline staff the room to be flexible and accommodating, a shift can begin towards fostering more FASD-informed correctional environments.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207