MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155697394 · doi:10.5539/jedp.v2n1p2

Parent Factors Related to Social Intervention Outcomes: Examining Immediate and Delayed Responders

2012· article· en· W2155697394 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tina L. Stanton‐Chapman, James Peugh, Erik W. Carter, Kristen Roorbach Jamison

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational and Developmental Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)PsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMultilevel modelClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to explore several family-related factors that may be associated with treatment response to an evidence-based social communication intervention targeting preschoolers with disabilities or at-risk. We used multilevel modeling to conduct retrospective analyses of data collected across a series of single-case intervention studies. Forty-six preschoolers participated in the study. The results of the positive peer interactions analyses indicated that children from married, separated, or widowed homes and children with mothers with high maternal education levels tended to interact more positively with their peers and decreased in their amount of play verbalizations over time relative to children whose parents were divorced or had low maternal education levels. Similar data patterns were found for both the immediate responders (e.g., children who make immediate progress once an intervention program has begun) and delayed responders (e.g., children who make changes in behavior after receiving a few or several intervention sessions).

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational and Developmental PsychologySame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207