MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126175006 · doi:10.1177/1049732314545497

Caregivers’ Management of Schooling for Their Children With Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder

2014· article· en· W2126175006 on OpenAlexaffabout
Suretha Swart, Wendy A. Hall, William T. McKee, Laurie Ford

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderGrounded theoryConstruct (python library)PsychologyParticipant observationDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyQualitative researchSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we describe a grounded theory study of how caregivers of school-aged children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) managed their children's schooling. We completed 30 interviews with 17 caregivers residing in a western Canadian province, as well as document analysis and 25 hours of participant observation. We used constant comparative analysis to construct our substantive theory: intertwining to fit in. The core variable is an iterative cycle caregivers used to resolve their main concerns: preventing their children from failing academically and in social interactions and preventing themselves from being regarded as unacceptable parents. To intertwine to fit in, caregivers used two strategies: orchestrating schooling and keeping up appearances. They also regulated their relationships with their children. "Intertwining to fit in" contributes to the literature on attachment and parenting and extends explanations about caregivers' advocacy for their children with FASD. The theory has implications for school personnel and practitioners, as well as researchers.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.344 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207