MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602018072 · doi:10.7202/1039015ar

L’implication paternelle dans l’éducation et les interventions de l’enfant qui présente un TSA avec ou sans DI. Des pistes pour mieux soutenir la participation des pères

2017· article· fr· W2602018072 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Isabelle Courcy, Carole Sénéchal

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelle · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depuis les dernières années, plusieurs recherches sont menées auprès de familles d’enfants présentant un trouble du spectre de l’autisme (TSA) avec ou sans déficience intellectuelle (DI). Cette recherche rend compte d’une perspective à ce jour peu documentée : celle des pères sur leur participation dans l’éducation et les interventions de leur enfant. Des entretiens semi-dirigés ont été menés auprès de neuf pères québécois. Une analyse qualitative a été effectuée. Les résultats montrent plusieurs formes d’implication rapportées par les participants, de même que l’importance du partage des responsabilités familiales et des services reçus sur leur perception de leur participation dans les interventions de leur enfant. Des pistes sont dégagées afin de mieux soutenir les pères qui désirent s’impliquer dans l’éducation et les interventions de leur enfant présentant un TSA avec ou sans DI.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.414
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelleSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207