MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157781174 · doi:10.2190/7y1m-unrt-9bp4-bwl1

Second Time around Parenting: Factors Predictive of Grandparents Becoming Caregivers for Their Grandchildren

2000· article· en· W2157781174 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Aging and Human Development · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison
KeywordsGrandparentGrandchildPsychologySolidarityDevelopmental psychologyMental healthLongitudinal studyPrimary caregiverGerontologyMedicinePsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

More than one in ten American grandparents raise a grandchild for at least six months, with most of these providing care for three years or more. This longitudinal study, utilizing data from the National Survey of Families and Households, identifies the pre-existing personal characteristics and contextual variables which are predictive of individuals becoming primary caregivers for their grandchildren. Contrary to hypothesis, pre-caregiving attitudes concerning intergenerational solidarity bore little relationship to the likelihood of becoming a caregiver. In contrast, being female, younger, African American, and having not completed high school were significantly predictive of becoming a custodial grandparent. Implications of these findings for research, practice, and policy in gerontology, mental health, and related areas 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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