MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1665515081 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs122010671

Meaningful Intervention with Children and Youth: A Reflection on Ten Years of Inquiry

2010· article· en· W1665515081 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sibylle Artz, Diana Nicholson, Elaine Halsall, Susan Larke

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersVancouver FoundationW.K. Kellogg Foundation
KeywordsSpan (engineering)PsychologyIntervention (counseling)Style (visual arts)Psychological interventionDevelopmental psychologyEngineeringHistoryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been known since the early 1970s that youth risk assessment does not necessarily assist us in determining youth needs and services. Still, where young people and crime are the concerned, interventions are often focused on risk assessment rather than need assessment, especially when these young people face incarceration. In this article we emphasize needs assessment and the development of a youth friendly approach to such assessment. We draw on a number of community-based and community involved studies that were conducted over a ten-year period, studies that focused on the perspectives, experiences, and needs of children and youth, and present as key among these studies a project on the development of a gender-sensitive tool for needs assessment that can aid workers with youth engagement and needs focused intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.114
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.075
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1140.075
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0250.037
Scholarly communication0.0200.020
Open science0.0080.029
Research integrity0.0130.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207