MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096280888 · doi:10.1177/0739986306293680

Central American Grandparents Raising Grandchildren

2007· article· en· W2096280888 on OpenAlexaffabout
Esme Fuller‐Thomson, Meredith Minkler

Bibliographic record

VenueHispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentPovertyQuarter (Canadian coin)Raising (metalworking)GerontologyDemographyPsychologyMedicineGeographyDevelopmental psychologySociologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study documents the prevalence and profile of Central American grandparents raising grandchildren in the United States of America. Using nationally representative data from the Census 2000 Supplementary Survey, Central American grandparent caregivers are compared with their noncare-giving peers. Results indicate that nationally an estimated 28,000 Central Americans were raising their grandchildren, representing approximately 1 in 20 Central Americans aged 45 and older. Caregiving grandparents were significantly younger and more likely to be married, to have not completed high school, and to be out of the labor force than were noncaregivers. Almost half of caregiving households were overcrowded and approximately a quarter were below the poverty line. Only 1% of caregivers who were living in poverty were accessing social assistance. Implications for practice and policy are discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHispanic Journal of Behavioral SciencesSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207