MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017696863 · doi:10.1515/ijamh.2003.15.1.31

Evaluation of the parent group experience. What helps and what hinders

2003· article· en· W2017696863 on OpenAlexaff
Harvey Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsychologysortPerceptionGroup (periodic table)Clinical psychologyPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicinePsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the responses of parents to questionnaires filled out as part of a group therapy program for parents whose adolescents exhibit conduct problems and refuse interventions. A brief description of the youth, parents and the program is followed by representative examples of the comments parents made at their termination from the group about their experiences and what helped them or hindered them in dealing with their situations and emotions. Their responses are compared and contrasted with the responses to Irving Yalom's adult groups responses to a Q-sort, which rated aspects of their groups from most helpful to least helpful. Parents' experiences are an informative guide as to their perceptions and what they feel helped or hindered them in this program.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207