MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999726640 · doi:10.1344/anpsic2019.49.17

Implementation of a Parenting Coordination Pilot Project in Montreal, Canada: What Did We Learn?

2019· article· en· W2999726640 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dominic A. D’Abate, Francine Cyr, Catherine Quigley

Bibliographic record

VenueAnuario de Psicología/The UB Journal of Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Dynamics and Relationships
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateIntervention (counseling)PsychosocialGovernment (linguistics)Christian ministryEconomic JusticeDilemmaPrivate sectorPolitical sciencePsychologyPublic relationsNursingMedicineLawPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For parents who experience high conflict following their separation or divorce, the various psychosocial and legal services provided by the government of Quebec or in the private sector have proven to be inadequate, resulting in an over-dependence on the court system and child protective services to provide solutions. In response to this social dilemma, the Quebec Ministry of Justice agreed in 2012 to fund a pilot project to determine if parenting coordination could provide some relief to the families and to the judicial system. A research team also had the mandate to evaluate the extent to which parenting coordination could eventually be integrated with other services being offered in both the public and private sectors. Between 2012 and 2014, ten families were followed by two parenting coordinators for a period ranging from six to 18 months. This article will present the interdisciplinary model put forward in the implementation of a parental coordination project, some highlights of the results of this pilot project and the recommendations that ensued.

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)0.002
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 score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnuario de Psicología/The UB Journal of PsychologySame topicFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsFrench-language works237,207