Mentoring is modestly effective for youth with a chronic illness or physical disability; however, program effectiveness may be enhanced when mentors and mentees are matched on shared interests and experiences. To test this hypothesis, mentees were randomly assigned to having a mentor with or without visual impairment (VI). Results showed that mentors without VI were younger and more likely to work or be educated in a helping profession and less likely to have a fixed mindset and extremely high positive expectations than mentors with VI. The main analyses on match outcomes showed that mentors with VI had significantly fewer and shorter match meetings, had a weaker relationship with their mentees, and were more likely to end their match prematurely. Mentor age, helping profession background, and fixed mindset were confounds in several analyses and reduced the significance of the relationship between VI group and match meeting quantity. The only relationship that remained significant controlling for covariates showed that matches including a mentor with VI were significantly more likely to end in premature closure than matches including a mentor without VI. Implications of the findings for future research and program practices related to matching were discussed.

BackgroundSocial participation is challenging for people with visual impairments. As a result, on average, social networks are smaller, romantic relationships formed later, educational achievements lower, and career prospects limited. Adolescents on their way towards achieving these goals may benefit from the knowledge and experience of adults who have overcome similar difficulties. Therefore, a mentoring intervention, called Mentor Support, will be set up and studied in which adolescents with visual impairments are matched with successfully social participating adults with and without visual impairments. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of Mentor Support. Secondary aims are to distinguish the importance of the disability-specific experience of mentors, predictors of success, and mediating factors.Methods/designThe effect of Mentor Support will be tested in a randomized clinical trial, using pre-test one week before starting, post-test after 12 months, and follow-up after 18 months. Participants will be referred to one of the experimental groups or the control group, and this randomization will be stratified according to country region. Three groups are included in the trial: 40 participants will receive Mentor Support by mentors with a visual impairment in combination with care-as-usual, 40 participants will receive Mentor Support by mentors without visual impairments in combination with care-as-usual, and 40 participants will receive care-as-usual only. Mentor Support consists of 12 face-to-face meetings of the mentee with a mentor with an overall time period of one year. On a weekly basis, dyads have contact via email, the Internet, or telephone. The primary outcome measure is improved social participation within three domains (work/school, leisure activities, and social relationships). Mediator variables are psychosocial functioning and self-determination. Predictors such as demographics and personality are also investigated in order to distinguish the pathways to successful social participation. Intention-to-treat and completer analyses will be conducted.DiscussionThe primary outcomes of this trial regard increased social participation. The study may yield insights to further improve effects of support programs to adolescents with visual impairments.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR4768 (registered 4 September 2014).

Purpose: The efficacy of a community-based mentoring program for adolescents with a visual impairment vs. care-as-usual was tested on social participation including satisfaction with social support. Materials and methods: Adolescents (15-22 years; 46% boys) were randomized to an intervention group with mentors with visual impairment (N ¼ 25), an intervention group with mentors without visual impairment (N ¼ 26), or care-as-usual (N ¼ 25). One-on-one mentoring activities regarded school/work, leisure activities, and social relationships. Results and conclusions: Multilevel growth modelling revealed no effect of mentoring on changes in social participation compared to the care-as-usual group (participation [95% CI-0.30, 0.21, d ¼ 0.1]; social participation composite [95% CI-0.24, 0.26, d ¼ 0.24]). Mentees matched to mentors with visual impairments increased more on satisfaction with their social support compared to mentees matched to mentors without impairments and the care-as-usual group [95% CI 0.02, 0.49, d ¼ 0.38]. Age, characteristics of the impairment, and number of match meetings were not associated with change in social participation during the mentoring program. This evaluation showed no benefit of mentoring for social participation of adolescents with a visual impairment. The value of mentors and mentees sharing the same disability needs further investigation. This trial is registered in the Netherlands Trial Register NTR4768. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION A community-based mentoring program resulted in no benefits for adolescents with a visual impairment on their social participation. A community-based mentoring program should not replace care-as-usual provided to young people with a visual impairment in the Netherlands. It could only be thought of as an additional service within rehabilitation. Matching mentees and mentors based on sharing the same disability could strengthen the effect of a community-based mentoring program. However, these benefits are rather small. Providing additional support for the social participation of young people with a visual impairment might be especially helpful for those with a progressive impairment and with comorbid problems.

Introduction: Youths with visual impairments (i.e., blindness or low vision) experience difficulties with forming and maintaining social relationships with peers. These difficulties challenge their psychosocial functioning and put them at risk of being lonelier later in life. The study's primary goal was to investigate how intra-and interpersonal factors during adolescence influence Loneliness in young adulthood. Methods: Analyses were conducted on data from a national data set. Participants (N ¼ 96) were interviewed at two different time points. General linear regression and mediation analyses were used to examine the role of social competence, personality, and satisfaction with social support, measured at mean age 17.83, and on Loneliness measured at mean age 23.45. Results: Analyses showed that adolescents with visual impairments who were more emotionally stable and had higher social competence during adolescence were less lonely later in life. In addition, the results showed that emotionally unstable adolescents reported lower social competence and, therefore, were lonelier in young adulthood. Discussion: These findings indicate that factors connected to Loneliness in young adulthood include people's personality traits and their level of social competence at a younger age. Implications for practitioners: Knowing the underlying causes of an individual's Loneliness assists practitioners in selecting what type of intervention would be suitable for addressing these issues. Those with low social skills benefit more from social