MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162634752 · doi:10.1177/10634266020100040601

Treatment of Oppositional Behavior in Children of Parents with Brain Injury and Chronic Pain

2002· article· en· W2162634752 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph M. Ducharme, Amy Davidson, Nancy Rushford

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSequelaPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Chronic painGeneralizationCompliance (psychology)Clinical psychologyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyAcquired brain injuryRehabilitationPsychiatrySocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following a brain injury, parents often experience dispositional changes that can have a devastating effect on family relationships. Such problems are often amplified by the presence of chronic pain,which is a common sequela of brain injury and can reduce or impede the parent's ability to maintain a warm and responsive relationship with the child. In this case study involving two fathers with brain injury and severe chronic pain, we evaluated the effects of errorless compliance training, a recently developed, nonintrusive and success-based intervention, on the cooperation of their sons. After their parents' head injury, the children became severely avoidant and oppositional with the injured parents. Following treatment, children demonstrated high levels of compliance to parental requests as well as generalization and maintenance of treatment gains. Errorless compliance training may be useful for assisting parents with cognitive, emotional, and physical impairments to maintain a more cooperative relationship with their children.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Emotional and Behavioral DisordersSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207