Contextual influences of parenting behaviors for children with neurodevelopmental disorders: results from a Canadian national survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This population-based study examined correlates of three parenting behaviors (positive interactions, consistency, and ineffective parenting) that have been shown to differ in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), with and without externalizing behavior problems (EBPs), as compared to children with neither condition. METHOD: The sample of children aged 4-11 (N = 14,226) was drawn from the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY). Analyses examined the associations of child, parental, and social context factors with parenting behaviors, and whether they differed by child health group. RESULTS: Child age, family functioning, and social support variables were significant predictors of all three parenting behaviors. Significant interaction effects highlight the importance of the child's sex, birth order, and support received from community or social service professionals, and that these factors have differential impacts on parenting behaviors depending on the child's health group. CONCLUSIONS: Other Child, parent, and social context factors are associated with parenting behaviors but these associations vary by the child's health group. Parenting behaviors differ for children with NDDs with and without EBPs. These findings offer important implications for practice and research and point to the importance of considering multiple contexts of influence, as well as their interactions, in understanding differences in parenting behaviors.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".