MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The systemic family assessment system: its validity with asthmatic children and their families

2007· article· en· W2069635589 on OpenAlex
Dóris Lieth Peçanha, Carl Lacharité

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

VenuePsicologia em Estudo · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndividuationConstruct validityPsychologyConcurrent validityDevelopmental psychologyConstruct (python library)Clinical psychologyPsychometricsPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construct and concurrent validity of the Systemic Family Assessment (SFA) system was tested. Participants were 11 asthmatic and 14 healthy Brazilian children (aged 5 to 9) along with their intact families. Measures included the SFA, the Family Colored Drawing Test with children (FCDT), and a semi-structured interview with parents (PI). Comparisons between families of asthmatic and healthy children yielded significant differences for all family dimensions of the SFA. The most affected dimensions for families of asthmatic children were the individuation process within the family, family conflicts, family integration and cohesion, roles, and quality of leadership within the family. Significative correlation between the SFA and the two independent measures were found. Results support the construct and concurrent validity of the SFA.

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)0.003
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.269 · 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