Effectiveness of Queen’s Parenting Program on Psychological Well-Being of Pre-School Children with Neuropsychological/Developmental Learning Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study aimed to examine the effectiveness of the Queen’s Parenting Program on psychological well-being of pre-school children with neuropsychological/developmental learning disability (NDLD). The population included all pre-school children with (NDLD). To conduct the research, using the stratified random sampling, 40 children with inclusion criteria were selected and then randomly put in the experimental and control groups. To collect data, the Wechsler Pre-school and primary Scale Intelligence (WPPSI) and Behavior Rating Inventory for Executive Function-Pre-school (BREIEF-P) for determining the inclusion criteria and the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) for measuring psychological well-being were used. The results of analyzing data using ANCOVA and MANOVA indicated that psychological wellbeing and its dimensions improved significantly in children of the experimental group in comparison with the control group (p<0.05). Therefore, Queen’s program is effective on the psychological wellbeing of children with pre-school children with neuropsychological/developmental learning disability.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".