MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776620816 · doi:10.11575/prism/35470

No Man Left Behind: How and Why to Include Fathers in Government-Funded Parenting Strategies

2016· article· en· W2776620816 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Dozois, Lana Wells, Deinera Exner‐Cortens, Elena Esina

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Left behindPsychologyPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2015, Shift released the Men and Boys Violence Prevention Project: Informing a Government of Alberta Action Plan to Engage Men and Boys to Stop Violence Against Women. One of the key priorities identified within this action plan was the need for new funding and support to increase positive fatherhood involvement as a key prevention strategy for domestic violence. To meet this need, Shift produced No Man Left Behind: How and Why to Include Fathers in Government-Funded Parenting Strategies (to download report, click on PDF below). This report draws on five different research methods to provide findings and recommendations specific to the Government of Alberta. It is our hope that this report will lead to a robust discussion along with policy, practice and investment changes throughout Alberta. For the details of the research that supported the development of this report, please see the Fatherhood Involvement Reference Report. Shift welcomes any feedback and would be pleased to present the research and recommendations to groups throughout Alberta.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207