MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Addressing the Developmental and Mental Health Needs of Young Children in Foster Care

2005· article· en· W1987876915 on OpenAlexaff
Laurel K. Leslie, Jeanne Gordon, Katina M. Lambros, Kamila Premji, J. Peoples, Kristin Gist

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsMental healthFoster careReferralWelfareIntervention (counseling)LegislationHealth carePublic healthPopulationMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryNursingPolitical scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research over the past two decades has consistently documented the high rates of young children entering the child protective services/child welfare system with developmental and mental health problems. There is an emerging evidence base for the role of early intervention services in improving outcomes for children with developmental and mental health problems in the general population that heavily relies on accurate and appropriate screening and assessment practices. The Child Welfare League of America, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have all published guidelines concerning the importance of comprehensive assessments and appropriate referral to early intervention services for children entering out-of-home care. Recent federal legislation (P.L. 108-36) calls for increased collaboration between child welfare and public agencies to address the developmental and mental health needs of young children in foster care. This paper provides a framework for health, developmental, and mental health professionals seeking to partner with child welfare to develop and implement programs addressing these critical issues.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.291 · 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
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

Citations137
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Developmental & Behavioral PediatricsSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207