MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

WHERE IS THE JUSTICE? PARENTAL EXPERIENCES OF THE CANADIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM IN CASES OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE*

2009· article· en· W1972185549 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Court Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic JusticeChild sexual abuseCITESCriminologyPsychologySexual abuseSexual assaultRestorative justiceSocial psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlPolitical scienceMedicineLawMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research concerning child victims of sexual abuse in the judicial system cites largely negative experiences and outcomes. However, few investigations focus on parental experiences of the justice system. Using a grounded theory method this Canadian study explored parental experiences of legal and judicial processes for child sexual abuse victims. Nineteen in‐depth interviews with parents encountering the justice system, as well as interviews with professionals working in those systems were analyzed. Results show a wide range of experiences, with parents reporting predominantly negative outcomes that potentially impede healing for children, indicating earlier judicial reforms have not been realized. Recommendations call for structural changes in the judicial system and more provision of parent‐focused supports.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.278 · 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