Grandparenting: Roles and responsibilities and its implications for kinship care policies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current literature with regard to grandparents providing care to their grandchildren, whether on an informal basis or when the children are under the auspices of children's protection services (state-mandated intervention), highlights a number of issues or concerns for the caregivers. In the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada), there is a focus on giving priority to grandparents (and significant others) as caregivers, which is embedded in the current child welfare legislation. There appears to be an underlying assumption that grandparents are willing and able to provide such care. However, no research has been completed in order to gain an understanding of some of the dynamics of caregiving by grandparents in this province. The authors are interested in grandparents as potential caregivers, particularly with regard to children who may come under the auspices of children's protection services. In addition, the policies and practices appear to be incongruent with current research, concerns and issues. This province is unique in that it has the fastest-growing senior population, the highest median age for seniors in Canada and has a high number of young families that have moved to other provinces to work. This research will provide insight into the willingness and ability of grandparents to provide care to their grandchildren, whether through informal or formal care (state intervention), as well as implications for current policies and practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".