MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1825266676 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs44201312700

SELF-REPORTED SYMPTOMS AND PARENTS’ EVALUATION OF BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS IN PRESCHOOLERS DISCLOSING SEXUAL ABUSE

2013· article· en· W1825266676 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Martine Hébert, Rachel Langevin, Marie-Josée Bernier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySexual abuseChild sexual abuseClinical psychologyAffect (linguistics)Developmental psychologyChild abuseMental healthDepressive symptomsSexual behaviorPsychiatryInjury preventionPoison controlMedicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;">Child sexual abuse is a prevalent social problem known to have a deleterious impact on the mental health. While sexual abuse may affect preschool children, there is a lack of knowledge regarding its short-term correlates, namely regarding internalized symptomatology due to the few available self-report measures. This study aims to (a) contrast self-reported symptomatology in a group of sexually abused preschoolers and a group of non-abused children, and (b) provide preliminary data on the psychometric properties of the adapted French version of the PRESS. Results indicate that children in the sexual abuse group (<em>n</em> = 59) show higher levels of self-reported depressive symptoms than children in the comparison group (<em>n </em>= 66). Caregivers described sexually abused preschoolers as displaying more internalized and externalized behavior problems than their non-abused peers. <strong></strong></span></p>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207