MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967595340 · doi:10.1111/jppi.12309

Factors that May Affect the Health of Siblings of Children Who Have an Intellectual/Developmental Disability

2019· article· en· W2967595340 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Intellectual disabilityPsychologyMental healthDevelopmental psychologyGerontologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract There are growing a number of children with an intellectual disability (ID). There is also evidence of poor health in the non‐disabled siblings of these children; indicating a possible need for policies and services to address a complex health issue. This article describes a narrative review of the literature regarding the mental and physical health of siblings of children who have an intellectual disability. The review examined 46 articles. Twenty‐one different factors were identified which may have an effect on the health of these siblings. Social determinants, individual variables, characteristics of the child with the disability, family characteristics, and support factors can all affect health. These variables are inter‐related and illustrate the need to account for complexity when studying the health of siblings of children who have an ID.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.311 · 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