MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277664594 · doi:10.1080/13575279.2015.1126225

Jeffrey Baldwin: A thematic analysis of media coverage and implications for social work practice

2016· article· en· W2277664594 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Choate

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care in Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentChild protectionThematic analysisChild careSocial workPsychologySocial mediaWork (physics)Child abuseBest practiceKey (lock)CriminologyPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyQualitative researchMedicineNursingSuicide preventionPoison controlLawSocial scienceEngineeringComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jeffery Baldwin died in 2002 in the care of his maternal grandparents. The case received intense media attention at various times over an almost eight-year period. Along with other public documents, the media coverage permits an analysis of the practice errors by Child Protection Services that are related to the failure to protect Jeffrey. Nine key themes emerged around core child protection practices: opening a file; the role of prior knowledge; issues related to assessment; knowing the child and their needs; the role of culture; case supervision; the child as the client; the enmeshment of child abuse; and the role of stability and healing. This analysis offers key lessons to be learned from such cases.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0150.016
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Care in PracticeSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207