Family dynamics and social network of families of children with special needs for complex/continuous cares
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
OBJECTIVE: To describe the family dynamics and the social support network for families of children with special needs of multiple, complex and continuous care. METHODS: A descriptive study of a qualitative approach, carried out in Maringá - PR, having as theoretical and methodological reference the Calgary Model of Family Assessment (CMFA). Data was collected through semi-structured audio-video interviews, carried out in the homes, together with 11 family caregivers of 13 children. RESULTS: Data is presented in the following categories: structural, developmental and functional evaluation, which show the changes in the family routine and the needs for the adjustment of the roles of its members, in order to better implement the care at home. CONCLUSIONS: Using the CMFA made it possible to identify and understand the composition, fragilities and potentialities of the family, as well as the relationships among its members and rearrangements to better enable care at home. This information favors interventions congruent with the needs of these families.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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