Intensive family preservation services: an examination of critical service components
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A treatment programme for child victims of sexual abuse within the family has been evaluated in terms of psychological and behavioural outcomes for the young people two years after beginning therapy. The Canadian programme was based on principles established by Giarretto in his Child Sexual Abuse Treatment Program (CSATP). Screening by child protection workers selected potential candidates. However, because of limited resources, referral of less than half of the originally screened families was made, even though they were judged suitable for participation. This made available an untreated comparison group (n = 30), similar in many ways to the treated families (n = 27). After two years the treated adolescents had largely recovered levels of self‐esteem obtained in normative samples, and depressive affect had diminished markedly, as had problem behaviours. By contrast, the untreated adolescents had retained low levels of self‐esteem, and high levels of depression. Negative behaviours (delinquency, running away from home, acts of deliberate self‐harm) had deteriorated after two years. This was linked both to further within‐family abuse (in a fifth), followed by a drift in some into street life. Despite its apparent success, the CSATP could not be continued because of lack of funding, and problems in maintaining a community development model for supporting a humanistic programme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".