MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112258296 · doi:10.1177/0143034313512407

Still a target: Sexual diversity and power of caring

2013· article· en· W2112258296 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Chiaki Konishi, Elizabeth Saewyc

Bibliographic record

VenueSchool Psychology International · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsPsychologyLesbianSexual orientationDevelopmental psychologyProtective factorLogistic regressionSexual minorityDistressEmotional distressClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the link between victimization and sexual orientation and how this link contributes to social-emotional health, extending to school-related outcomes among adolescents. Of additional interest was to explore the role of having caring adult support as a protective factor to reduce the risk for high levels of distress or enhance positive aspects of life experiences. Participants included 27,245 students (14,114 girls) in grades 7-12 in Western Canada. Results of logistic regression revealed that Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual youth who had experiences of being victimized were at greatest risk for social-emotional and school-related problems, including educational aspiration and activity engagement. Our results also showed that having caring support from parent or teacher significantly contributed to reducing the likelihood of experiencing social-emotional and educational difficulties even among victimized sexual minority students as well as heterosexual youth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchool Psychology InternationalSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207