MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128771943 · doi:10.1352/1944-7558-116.4.305

Moving From Family Care to Residential and Supported Accommodation: National, Longitudinal Study of People With Intellectual Disabilities

2011· article· en· W2128771943 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roy McConkey, Fionnola Kelly, Hasheem Mannan, Sarah Craig

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespite careAccommodationQuarter (Canadian coin)Residential careLongitudinal studyCohortPsychologyGerontologyMedicineNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A cohort of nearly 11,000 persons was traced over 8 years to determine those who had moved from family care and those who had remained. The majority (85%) continued to live with families, and, for two thirds (67%), no future move was deemed necessary. The 2 main predictors of moving were as follows: A need had been previously recorded and the family had used out-of-home respite services during the 8 years. However, just one quarter of those identified as needing to move had done so in the 8 years. Conversely, no prior indication of need had been recorded for two thirds of people who had moved in this period. The complexities of assessing need and equitably meeting demands 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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal on Intellectual and Developmental DisabilitiesSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207