MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417090064

Effets de la fréquentation d’un service de garde éducatif (SGÉ) sur le développement langagier des enfants issus de milieux défavorisés et négligés : état des connaissances

2016· article· fr· W2417090064 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Julien

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il est reconnu que les SGÉ exercent un rôle protecteur sur le développement langagier (DL) des enfants issus de milieux défavorisés (EIMD). Parallèlement à cela, on observe que les familles négligentes présentent plusieurs caractéristiques de défavorisation. Or, le langage est la sphère de développement la plus souvent compromise chez les enfants négligés. Puisque la fréquentation d’un SGÉ agit comme facteur de protection du DL des EIMD, quelques chercheurs ont étudié les effets de la fréquentation d’un SGÉ auprès d’enfants négligés. Cette recension fait état des connaissances à ce sujet. La fréquentation à temps complet, l’entrée précoce et le milieu structuré seraient associés à des retombées positives sur le DL des EIMD, ce qui ressort dans de rares études auprès des enfants négligés. La qualité du milieu, plus précisément la qualité des interactions, serait un paramètre déterminant.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207