Is adequate parenting compatible with maternal drug use? A 5‐year follow‐up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This prospective, cohort study compares child protection outcomes over the first 5 years of life in a group of children born to self-declared drug-using mothers recruited during pregnancy (cases) and a group of children matched for gestational age, chronological age, maternal neighbourhood and place of delivery whose mothers made no such declaration of problematic drug use (controls). METHODOLOGY: We monitored local child protection registers to identify cohort members who came to the attention of the local authority. RESULTS: Of the 71 original cases and 142 original controls, 55 (77%) and 96 (68%) remained in the area enrolled in local schools at 5 years of age. In total, 26 (47.3%) of the case children were subject to child protection procedures compared with 18 (18.8%) of the control children. This risk difference of 28.5% (95% CI 13.2% to 43.9%) has increased marginally since our previous report in this journal of child protection outcomes at 18 months of age (32% vs. 7%). However, the level of intervention deemed necessary to protect the child has increased significantly with six cases (compared with one control child) taken into the care of the local authority. CONCLUSIONS: Despite early maternal intentions and multiple supportive interventions, 27% of children born to women with significant substance abuse problems in our area required child protection during the pre-school years. Child protection risk assessment procedures need to weigh problematic maternal drug use heavily. Intervention studies with child welfare outcomes are needed to identify the most effective harm reduction strategies and inform public debate on how we can minimize child abuse related to substance misuse.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".