Seeing the pandemic through children's eyes: Exploring Turkish children's views on COVID‐19 pandemic by focus‐group discussions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on children and youth people are well documented. Little is known about children's experiences of the pandemic in their own words. We aimed to explore Turkish children's experiences and views about the pandemic, across private and public educational systems. METHODS: Six focus group discussions were conducted online with 30 children aged between 7 to 18 years in 2021. Children were enrolled through snowball sampling technique according to developmental age groups. A thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: We identified five themes: Compliance with public health measures about preventing the spread of COVID-19, changes in daily routines, emotional responses to the pandemic, distance education, and adaptive responses. Overall, children were well informed and receptive to the public health preventive measures with the exception of older children's tendency to disregard physical distancing with friends. They reported frustration with those who did not comply with measures and believed that the authorities should strictly enforce public health requirements. Emotional responses comprised fear of family members and themselves being infected, anxiety produced by the uncertainty of the virus, and the loss of social support. There was a perceived disparity between students from public and private schools regarding academic self-competence. Positive aspects of the pandemic included positive interactions with family members and the acquisition of new hobbies. Although most children acknowledged the support of their parents to deal with challenges, children of health workers were particularly isolated in terms of emotional support. CONCLUSION: Our findings offer additional insights and validate previous research on the negative and positive effects of COVID-19 from the child's perspective across private and public educational systems. This study contributes to global advocacy efforts aimed at understanding the impact of the pandemic on 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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».