MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1859074434 · doi:10.25336/p6qk58

The National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth - Overview and Changes After Three Cycles

2001· article· en· W1859074434 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sylvie Michaud

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Studies in Population · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptation
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurvey researchNational Longitudinal SurveysSurvey methodologySample (material)Data collectionSurvey samplingSurvey data collectionSurvey instrumentPsychologyGeographyMedicineEnvironmental healthPopulationApplied psychologyDemographic economicsSocial scienceSociologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth is a long-term study to monitor child development and well being of Canada’s children as they grow from infancy to adulthood. To do so, a representative sample of Canadian children aged between 0-11 years old was selected and interviewed in 1994- 1995. Interviews are conducted every two years and the current plans are to follow that cohort of children until they reach the age of 25. The survey has now gone through three collection cycles and already a number of changes have been observed. The paper will give an overview of the objectives of the survey, the survey design, the collection methodology, the survey content and the products and research that has already been done on the survey. The last section will present the future direction of the survey.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.016
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.354
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.064 · 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

Citations6
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Studies in PopulationSame topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptationFrench-language works237,207