Understanding the Intergenerational Cycle of Child Protective Service Involvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents in foster care have a higher pregnancy rate than those who are not in foster care. Children of adolescent mothers are also more likely to be maltreated than children of older mothers.1,2 This is perhaps one of the clearest examples of intergenerational maltreatment. The challenge is determining how to change the trajectory of the children of adolescents in foster care to decrease the unfortunate phenomenon of these children “grandchilding” into foster care. In this issue of Pediatrics , Wall-Wieler et al3 investigate the risk of foster care placement before the second birthday for children of adolescents placed in foster care during pregnancy. They do this through a data linkage of the Population Data Research Repository at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and physician claims, hospitalization data, and child protection information. Mothers who were ˂18 years of age and gave birth to their first child in Manitoba County over a 15-year period ending in 2013 were included. The data set included a total of 5946 mothers, of which 9.7% ( n = 576) were in foster care at the time of the birth. The investigators are to be commended for opening the door on this complex topic. We note several concerns with the study that should … Address correspondence to Rachel P. Berger, MD, MPH, Department of Pediatrics, Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4117 Penn Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15224. E-mail: rachel.berger{at}chp.edu
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".