MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018807941 · doi:10.1177/13674935030074001

Differences and similarities between mothers’ and fathers’ experiences of parenting a child with a disability

2003· article· en· W2018807941 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Health Care · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDevelopmental psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative study used focus groups to identify the differences and similarities in the experiences of parents of children with a disability. Two main themes emerged, showing the ways in which the mothers and fathers are alike or different. One concerns roles, actual and expected, in the various subsystems of family life. The other concerns the normalization and stigmatization that arise because of the child's problem. Mothers tend to score better in terms of interpersonal and group communications. It would seem that the fathers' expectations are harder to fulfil than the mothers'. The fathers' expectations are attuned to the outer world; the actual day-to-day tasks related to the child's care are not their priority. The mothers are less demanding and their expectations are more self-focused. Interestingly, these families are similar to families of children without a disability; however, the difficulties they experience are accentuated by the presence of a child with a problem.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.368

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.316 · 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