A holistic approach to child development: factors influencing overall development in children in care in Ontario, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Child development is complex and definitions and categorizations are not universal. This can make a cohesive approach difficult for the many parties who have a responsibility to support and encourage development in young children in out-of-home care. In order to align policy priorities and simplify decision-making, it is perhaps more appropriate to take a holistic approach to child development, to recognize the interconnectedness of domains, and to promote development as inclusive and continuous. Objective: This presentation explores the developmental assessment of young children living in out-of-home care using the Ages and Stages Questionnaires® Third Edition (ASQ-3™; Squires & Bricker, 2009). Since 2016, the ASQ-3 has been integrated into the Assessment and Action Record (AAR-C2-2016; Flynn, Miller, & Desjardins, 2016), the core instrument of the Ontario Looking After Children (OnLAC) needs assessment and outcome monitoring project. Phase I of this study sought to examine and explain the relationship between the five domains of development measured by the ASQ-3 (communication, gross motor, fine motor, problem solving, and personal-social). Phase II aimed to provide decision-makers, including practitioners, caregivers, and policy-makers, with evidence of demographic, risk, and protective factors affecting overall development for children in care. Method: Phase I. We performed an exploratory factor analysis using a cross-sectional sample of 1,459 children aged eight months to five years living in out-of-home care in Ontario, Canada, in an attempt to further simplify ASQ-3 data and discover any underlying factors affecting subscale scores. Phase II. We conducted a 3-step hierarchical regression using a subsample of 1,097 children aged one to five years to examine the effect of possible predictors on overall development. Results: The factor analysis indicated that there was a single underlying construct reflected in the five ASQ-3 domains, which justified the creation of a composite score of overall development (α = .85). Higher scores on the composite measure indicate a higher level of overall development. The follow-up regression model was significant and explained 34% of the variance in overall development. Increased literacy-promoting activities, the child’s positive view of his/her abilities, and kinship placement were significant protective factors, and gender (male), social-emotional difficulty, and a higher number of other children living in the placement were significant risk factors. The child’s age was not a statistically significant predictor of overall development. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that a simplified, holistic approach to child development is appropriate for use with young children in care. The domains of development measured by the ASQ-3 are tightly-tied; by promoting protective factors and addressing risk factors, decision-makers in a child’s life have the opportunity to positively shape his/her developmental outcome across all domains.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».