Strengthening Family Climate and Parent-Adolescent Relationship Quality Through the Teen Positive Parenting Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the baseline characteristics of five parents who accessed the Level Four Group Teen Triple-P Positive Parenting Program (LFG Teen PPP) within Alberta, Canada, as well as pre-post changes in two parents and one parent-adolescent dyad following program completion. The LFG Teen PPP is an eight-session behavioural parent-training program designed to reduce adolescent social-emotional and behavioural problems (SEBs), parent-adolescent conflict, inter-parental conflict over child rearing, and parental maladjustment and to improve familial and parent-adolescent relationship quality through teaching positive parenting practices. Measures of demographics, adolescent SEBs, dysfunctional parenting practices, parent-adolescent conflict, inter-parental conflict over child rearing, parental mental health, family climate, and parent-adolescent relationship quality were completed by parents and adolescents immediately after the first (T1) and last (T2) sessions and one-month after the last (T3) session. Results indicated that parents were similar to one another with regards to baseline demographics, severity of adolescent SEBs, degree of inter-parental conflict over child rearing, and family climate, and were aligned with international samples with respect to baseline demographics, use of dysfunctional parenting practices, and degree of parent-adolescent conflict. Results indicated statistically and clinically significant changes in most parent and adolescent-reported outcomes. Implications, limitations, and directions for future research are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".