MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051033193 · doi:10.1177/000271620157800106

Early Parent Training to Prevent Disruptive Behavior Problems and Delinquency in Children

2001· article· en· W2051033193 on OpenAlexaff
Odette Bernazzani, Catherine Côté, Richard E. Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenile delinquencyIntervention (counseling)Parent trainingPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyConduct disorderPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early forms of disruptive behaviors in children often leading to juvenile delinquency are associated with poor parenting skills. Thus early intervention programs targeting parenting skills may have an important impact on disruptive behaviors in children. The objective of this review was to assess the impact of early parenting and home visitation programs on behavior problems and delinquency in children. Selected trials were identified using electronic databases and relevant reviews. The following selection criteria were used: (1) the intervention involved the provision of parent training to families with a child under age 3, and (2) the design was a randomized or quasi-experimental trial. Overall, of the seven trials identified, only three reported some beneficial effects on disruptive behavior or delinquency. Due to the limited number of adequately designed studies, caution is recommended in the interpretation of available results. Numerous well-designed early prevention experiments specifically targeting disruptive behaviors and delinquency should be initiated.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations47
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social ScienceSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207