MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151544249 · doi:10.1177/107484070100700203

Supporting Parents: Can Intervention Improve Parent-Child Relationships?

2001· article· en· W2151544249 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Letourneau, Jane Drummond, Darcy Fleming, Gerard M. Kysela, Linda McDonald, Moira Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Nursing · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Psychological resiliencePovertySocial supportMental healthPsychologyRandomized controlled trialMedicineDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyNursingPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Healthy child development has been identified as one of the key determinants of health and resiliency in adulthood. This article reports on the results of two pilot studies of randomized controlled trials of parent support interventions aimed at improving the parent-child relationship and indirectly enhancing the resilience capacity among at-risk children. Participating children were at risk for mental health problems due to poverty and/or their parents’ lack of educational attainment, inexperience, and young age. The interventions were composed of parenting skills training and social support. Eighteen families participated in Supportive Intervention I, and 34 families participated in Supportive Intervention II. Results suggested that parent-child relationships were enhanced in both pilot studies. These promising findings offer direction for future research and for nurses and other interventionists providing support to young at-risk families.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.431
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations54
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family NursingSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207