MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974333180 · doi:10.2174/1874922400801010023

Rewards of Parenting a Child with a Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

2008· article· en· W1974333180 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Brown, Susan Rodger, Natalie George, David St. Arnault, Jennifer Sintzel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Family Studies Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderFetal alcoholPsychologyAlcoholSpectrum (functional analysis)Developmental psychologyChemistryPregnancyPhysicsBiologyOrganic chemistryGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a considerable amount of research on the challenges associated with parenting children who have disabilities, and little that focuses on positive aspects.The purpose of the study was to describe the rewards of parents of children with a fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD).Nineteen birth, foster or adoptive parents were asked to answer the following question: "What are the rewards of parenting a child with a FASD?"The data were analyzed using multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis.Four clusters resulted.Parents indicated that they saw the children's effort, growth, and accomplishment in a variety of domains as encouraging.Parents also reported feeling appreciated by the children.Results suggest that rewarding parenting experiences with children who have alcohol-related disabilities are multiple, diverse and, when compared to the literature, largely consistent.The results lend credibility to the existing literature on the rewards of parenting children with developmental disabilities, and FASD in particular.

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)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Family Studies JournalSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207