Change in mental health status of young children participating in a respite service.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the extent of changes in mental health status of children in a respite service as little has been reported on this aspect of respite care. METHOD: All families enrolled in a new centre-based respite program in a moderately large urban center in Canada were invited to participate. The child's primary caregiver completed the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) at baseline, mid-point and endpoint, as did respite staff. A comparison group of primary caregivers seeking respite care also completed the same ratings at baseline and at one-follow-up point. RESULTS: The children's primary caregivers perceived high levels of mental health difficulties in their children at baseline; significantly more than respite providers. No significant changes were found between SDQ baseline and endpoint values for either primary caregivers or respite workers. The amount of change between baseline and midpoint was no different for the intervention and comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence of a positive impact on child mental health status by the new respite program as measured by the SDQ was detected. Specific evidence-based child mental health interventions may need to be paired with respite care to improve child mental health outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".