MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975767591 · doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.705435

Child maltreatment as a global phenomenon: From trauma to prevention

2013· letter· en· W1975767591 on OpenAlexaff
Chantal Cyr, Geneviève Michel, Marilyne Dumais

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychology · 2013
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeglectPhenomenonEthnic groupPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Intervention (counseling)Child abuseDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlPsychiatryMedicineEnvironmental healthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past studies have clearly showed the negative impact of neglect and abuse on child development at both the psychological and neurobiological levels. To date, many studies have focused on identifying risk and protective factors occurring at all levels of the ecology. However, more distal-level variables, such as culture and ethnicity, have not been studied as much as those of more proximal levels; yet studies in Western countries have consistently found an overrepresentation of child maltreatment reports among ethnic minority groups. In this commentary, we reflect on a series of articles examining maltreatment from a crosscultural perspective and using samples of diverse countries. Taken together, studies in this special section document the terrible fact that maltreatment is a global phenomenon. Through a summary of these studies' main findings and concerns, we highlight four key points that we believe are important to consider for future research and intervention efforts.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0140.016
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations32
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of PsychologySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207