Parental appraisal of the family impact of childhood developmental disability: Times of sadness and times of joy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Parental positive and negative appraisals of the family impact of childhood disability are tested as early predictors of parental self-esteem and overall family adjustment in households with young children with intellectual and developmental disabilities. METHOD: Within 103 Canadian families, 103 mothers and 55 fathers independently completed interviews in their home at two time points: 6 months after their child entered childhood disability services (T1), and one year later (T2). RESULTS: Longer-term family adjustment was found to be predicted by level of parental negative appraisal of the family impact of disability, and by level of self-esteem, for both mothers and fathers. For mothers, positive appraisal of childhood disability was also found to predict early family adjustment and was related to enhanced self-esteem. CONCLUSIONS: Gender differences in parental appraisal of the family impact of childhood disability appear to merge over time. Both positive and negative appraisals appear to coexist and are predictive of mothers' and fathers' perceived overall family adjustment in the longer term.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".