‘Working Out Dads’ to promote men’s mental and physical health in early fatherhood: A mixed-methods evaluation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mental and physical health problems are common during early fatherhood. The current study aimed to assess a broad range of mental, physical and social outcomes for fathers of young children (aged 0–4 years) participating in a pilot evaluation of ‘Working Out Dads’ (WOD). These results were complemented by a nested qualitative study capturing the perceived outcomes for fathers. The sample consisted of 53 fathers who completed pre-, post- and 3-month follow-up measures. There were significant reductions in psychological distress, depression, anxiety and stress from pre- to post-intervention, which were maintained at 3-month follow-up. There were significant improvements in perceived vitality levels across all time points, and improvements in general physical health, social support and parenting self-efficacy from pre- to the 3-month follow-up. The nested qualitative results revealed that fathers and their partners perceived positive changes to paternal health, social support, parenting and the couple relationship. These findings contribute to the evidence-base for interventions targeting fathers’ health in the early years of their children's lives. The current findings will be used to inform further development of WOD.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it