Retombées et leçons apprises de la mise en place d’un programme de soutien aux familles (OASIS+)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Framework: In Quebec, parents with a child who has an intellectual disability (ID) or autism have many unmet needs for respite and support for social participation. This article focuses on OASIS+, an experimental support program designed to meet such needs by working with students from professional training programs.Objectives: This research aims to document the benefits of the OASIS+ experimental program for families and students, and to identify the lessons learned during its implementation.Methodology: A mixed method approach was used with measures taken before, during and after the experimental program with parents, students, and advisory committee members. Results: Seventeen families and ten social work and occupational therapy students participated in the OASIS+ program between September 2019 and March 2020. Of those accompanied, 41% had ID, 35% had autism and 24% had a dual diagnosis. Results indicate the following benefits for parents: decreased in the feeling of parental overload, an improvement in their social participation, and a better reconciliation of their family, social and professional roles. Students perceived an improvement in their knowledge and skills. Lessons learned include recruitment, pairing, student training and support, services delivered, coordination, and program sustainabilityConclusions: OASIS+ is an innovative program that supports families who have a child with ID or autism while helping to train future professionals. Contribution: An evaluation of programs has shown the contribution of OASIS+ in supporting families and has identified key elements to consider in its implementation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".