MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3129892835 · doi:10.1101/2021.02.10.21251507

Responsive caregiving, opportunities for early learning, and children’s safety and security during COVID-19: A rapid review

2021· review· en· W3129892835 sur OpenAlexaff
Kerrie Proulx, Rachel Lenzi, Rachel Hatch, Kristy Hackett, Carina Omoeva, Vanessa Cavallera, Bernadette Daelmans, Tarun Dua

Notice bibliographique

RevuemedRxiv · 2021
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInfant Development and Preterm Care
Établissements canadiensLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPandemicNeglectEarly childhoodPsychologyMental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Child developmentGrey literatureDevelopmental psychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicinePsychiatryMEDLINE

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction During the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been drastic changes in family life and programs and services that promote and protect early childhood development. Global stakeholders have raised concerns that the pandemic is putting enormous strain on parents and other caregivers, compromising capabilities and enabling environments for nurturing care of young children and therefore likely impacting children’s development. Methodology This rapid review takes stock of emerging research on nurturing care for young children during the COVID-19 crisis. Two databases were searched in addition to an extensive search for grey literature, drawing on 112 scholarly and scientific studies from more than 30 countries that have examined components of nurturing care during the pandemic, namely: responsive caregiving, early learning and play, and children’s safety and security. Results There are some reports of unexpected positive benefits of the pandemic on families, including increased father involvement in caregiving. But more commonly, the studies’ findings reveal numerous issues of concern, including parental and caregiver mental health difficulties and less responsive parent-child relationships, increased screen time among children, limited opportunities for outdoor play, and fractured systems for responding to potential child neglect and maltreatment. Evidence suggests limited access and challenges in the provision of remote learning for the youngest learners, such as those in early childhood education. Conclusion The findings can inform global stakeholders, who have advocated for increased support and funding to ensure young children and other caregivers are supported and protected during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is an urgent need for action-oriented implementation studies – those that go beyond identifying trends and begin to pinpoint “what works” to effectively promote and protect nurturing care during emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Key questions What is already known? The most fundamental promotive experiences in the early years of life to reach optimal development come from nurturing care and protection received from parents, family, and community, which have lifelong benefits including improved health and wellbeing. Health and other emergencies are detrimental to the provision of nurturing care. What are the new findings? Findings from this rapid review reveal numerous areas of concern, including families reporting mental health difficulties and less responsive parent-child relationships, increased screen time among children, limited opportunities for outdoor play, and fractured systems for responding to potential child neglect and maltreatment. As with other features of this pandemic, not all families are affected equally: financially vulnerable families are much more likely to experience negative ramifications. The pandemic is also disproportionately affecting parents and other caregivers with young children, particularly mothers, those with pre-existing mental health difficulties, and those caring for children with disabilities. What do the new findings imply? Findings highlight the need for action by governments, civil society, international and community-based organizations to improve support for families so that the pandemic does not break the provision of nurturing care and wipe out decades of progress, especially for vulnerable families and children.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,912
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,059
Tête enseignante GPT0,336
Écart entre enseignants0,278 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations27
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuemedRxivMême sujetInfant Development and Preterm CareTravaux en français237 207