MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2606512595 · doi:10.1186/s13034-017-0162-7

Infants and the decision to provide ongoing child welfare services

2017· article· en· W2606512595 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joanne Filippelli, Barbara Fallon, Nico Trocmé, Esme Fuller‐Thomson, Tara Black

Bibliographic record

VenueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReferralWelfareMedicineChild and adolescent psychiatryIntervention (counseling)NeglectSafeguardingChild abuseSocial WelfarePsychologyPsychiatryFamily medicineDevelopmental psychologyPoison controlNursingSuicide preventionEnvironmental healthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Infants are the most likely recipients of child welfare services; however, little is known about infants and families who come into contact with the child welfare system and factors that are associated with service provision. Investigations involving infants and their families present an unparalleled opportunity for the child welfare sector to enhance infants' safety and well-being through early identification, referral and intervention. Understanding how the child welfare system responds to the unique needs of infants and caregivers is critical to developing appropriate practice and policy responses within the child welfare sector and across other allied sectors. This study examines maltreatment-related investigations in Ontario involving children under the age of one to identify which factors are most influential to predicting service provision at the conclusion of a child welfare investigation. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the fifth cycle of the Ontario Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (OIS) for 2013 was conducted. The OIS is a cross-sectional child welfare study that is conducted every 5 years. The most influential factors that were associated with the decision to transfer a case to ongoing services were explored through a multivariate tree-classification technique, Chi square automatic interaction detection. RESULTS: There were an estimated 7915 maltreatment-related investigations involving infants in 2013. At least one caregiver risk factor was identified in approximately three-quarters (74%) of investigations involving infants. In the majority of investigations (57%), at least one referral for specialized services was provided. Primary caregiver with few social supports was the most highly significant predictor of the decision to provide ongoing child welfare services. Primary caregiver risk factors were predominant in this model. The analysis identified subgroups of investigations involving infants for which the likelihood of being transferred to ongoing services ranged from approximately 11-97%. CONCLUSION: Caregivers of infants are struggling with numerous challenges that can adversely compromise their ability to meet the unique developmental needs of their infant. The findings underscore the importance of community and social supports in decision-making.

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)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental HealthSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207