MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118640027 · doi:10.7202/706797ar

Placement en famille d’accueil. Étude sur les variables associées aux contacts entre l’enfant placé et ses parents

2005· article· fr· W2118640027 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marie-Andrée Poirier, Marie Simard, Jacques Vachon

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude porte sur le maintien des liens entre l’enfant placé et ses parents. Elle a pour objectif de connaître la fréquence et la durée des visites chez ses parents de l’enfant placé et d’identifier les variables pouvant y être associées. Les données ont été recueillies à l’aide d’un questionnaire administré par entrevue auprès de 58 parents ayant un enfant placé en famille d’accueil régulière depuis au moins six mois et ayant des contacts non supervisés avec ce dernier. Les parents furent sélectionnés parmi la clientèle de quatre centres jeunesse au Québec. Les résultats indiquent que 43 % des parents reçoivent la visite de leur enfant plus de deux fois par mois et que les enfants passent en moyenne quatre jours par mois chez leurs parents. Les principales variables associées à la fréquence et à la durée des visites de l’enfant chezses parents sont le temps de transport, les raisons de placement, la séparation des membres de la fratrie dans des milieux d’accueil différents et la prévision ou non du retour de l’enfant dans son milieu familial.

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)0.007
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 score0.321
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService socialSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207