MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Parents as Advocates for Children with IBD at School

2015· book-chapter· en· W2504166418 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in early childhood and K-12 education · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePopulationPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) is an “invisible” chronic illness, which is largely internal without significant observable external symptoms. Children with IBD experience painful and fluctuating physical symptoms caused by intestinal inflammation, as well as side effects from the medications. As a result, they necessitate special accommodations while they are in school. The Quebec Education Act (2010) stipulates that adequate services for a diverse student population must be provided. A case study conducted by Gordon (2013) with five families that participated in individual, semi-structured interviews revealed that families with a child with IBD functioned relatively well. These outcomes are contrary to the literature on families of children with disabilities. However, in Quebec public schools, parents and their children experienced teachers who lacked awareness of IBD and who provided insufficient classroom support. Hence, parents-(predominantly mothers) played an integral role in advocating for necessary accommodations on their child's behalf. This chapter will present the parents' school experiences and conclude with practical recommendations for teachers and families.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in early childhood and K-12 educationSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207