MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338343099 · doi:10.3138/jcfs.43.6.871

Left Behind: The Experiences of Children of the Caribbean Whose Parents Have Migrated

2012· article· en· W2338343099 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mona Dillon, Christine A. Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Family Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeft behindPsychologyDistressQualitative researchDevelopmental psychologySociologyClinical psychologyMental healthSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Caribbean region has high levels of migration, yet limited research exists on the effects of parental migration on children left behind. We searched electronic databases, websites and grey literature and found 20 studies examining the experiences of Caribbean children left behind as a result of migrating parents. Left-behind children of migrants are more likely to experience emotional distress and negative effects of the breakdown of family structures and relationships than those in non-migrant households, with evidence being mixed for the effects on education and health. For children who eventually migrate, the resettlement process compounds the impacts experienced in the home country. Results should be interpreted cautiously since quantitative investigations comprise single studies on a limited number of variables within selected populations. Challenges in qualitative investigations include underrepresentation of males and inability to fully capture participants’ experiences prior to resettling. More research is required on the impact of gender differences of the migrating parent and gender-specific responses of 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations28
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Family StudiesSame topicMigration and Labor DynamicsFrench-language works237,207