MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring the Relationship Between Maternal Migraine and Child Functioning

2003· article· en· W2078720056 on OpenAlexaff
Maria A. Fagan

Bibliographic record

VenueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face Pain · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoEmployment and Social Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigrainePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between mothers' migraines and the roles and expectations of their children. METHODS: Twenty-five mothers diagnosed with migraine completed questionnaires concerning their levels of migraine-related disability and their parenting and child-rearing attitudes. Migraine-related disability was assessed using the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (version 2.1). Parenting and child-rearing attitudes were assessed using the Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory. RESULTS: Significant positive relationships were found between the mothers' migraine-related disability and both inappropriate expectations of their children and parent-child role reversal; ie, the more migraine-related disability reported by the mothers, the more they reported having inappropriate expectations of their children and favoring parent-child role reversal. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that migraine may be associated with dysfunctional parenting patterns. More specifically, it suggests that in families wherein the mother has migraine, children may be at risk of inappropriately or prematurely assuming roles for which they are developmentally unready. Clinical implications are that mothers with migraine may benefit from some type of family-focused intervention, in addition to headache treatment.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations18
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeadache The Journal of Head and Face PainSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207