MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Two‐generation preschool programme: immediate and 7‐year‐old outcomes for low‐income children and their parents

2012· article· en· W1954579063 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild & Family Social Work · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEarly Childhood Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialIntervention (counseling)PsychologyTest (biology)Low incomeSingle parentDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSocioeconomicsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Preschool children living in low‐income families are at increased risk for poor outcomes; early intervention programmes mitigate these risks. While there is considerable evidence of the effectiveness of centre‐based programmes in other jurisdictions, there is limited research about C anadian programmes, specifically programmes that include children and parents. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a single‐site, two‐generation preschool demonstration programme for low‐income families in C anada. A single group, pre‐test (programme intake) /post‐test (programme exit) design with a 7‐year‐old follow‐up was used. Between intake and exit, significant improvements in receptive language and global development were found among the children, and significant improvements in self‐esteem, use of community resources, parenting stress and risk for child maltreatment were found among the parents. These positive improvements were sustained until the children were 7 years old. Public investment in two‐generation preschool programmes may mitigate risks for suboptimal child development and improve parental psychosocial 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.267 · 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