Latino Solo Grandparents Raising Grandchildren
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this descriptive report is to provide the first representative information on the sociodemographic profile and the prevalence of mental and physical health conditions of two "at-risk" groups of Latino caregivers: solo grandparent caregivers and single parents. METHODS: The 2012 Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System was used to compare five dimensions of health on a sample of Latino solo grandparents and Latino single parents, raising their grandchildren/children alone. Bivariate and logistic regression comparative analyses were conducted on study measures. RESULTS: Latino solo grandparents have a high prevalence of chronic health conditions, including arthritis (51%), depression (40%), diabetes (34%), and asthma (34%). Latino single parents have lower but troubling health risks, including depression (22%), diabetes (14%), and asthma (14%). Differences between the two groups were largely due to the grandparents older age. DISCUSSION: Latino solo grandparents have a high prevalence of several chronic medical conditions. The prevalence of disorders is much lower for Latino single parents, although they too have disturbing health risks. CONCLUSION: Latino solo grandparents perform their parenting role under intense physical and emotional strain. Health professionals can be instrumental in facilitating interventions that affect the well-being of this expanding family group.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".