MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091410305 · doi:10.1080/13632750601022212

Reactive attachment disorder in looked‐after children

2006· article· en· W2091410305 on OpenAlex

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

VenueEmotional and Behavioural Difficulties · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthFoster carePsychologyAnxietyDepression (economics)PsychiatryClinical psychologyIntervention (counseling)MedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The great majority of children living in foster or residential care have been abused and neglected. Mental health problems are common and the nature of these problems may be rooted in early attachment relationships. The carers of 82 children in care in Scotland and 125 children from local schools completed questionnaires on mental health problems including Reactive Attachment Disorder. More than half (53%) of the children in care fulfilled criteria for mental health problems compared with 13% of the control group, and children living in care scored significantly higher for conduct problems, emotional problems (anxiety and depression), hyperactivity, problems with peer relations and Reactive Attachment Disorder. This has important implications for service development for this vulnerable group of children.

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)0.000
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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