MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3037298302 · doi:10.2196/18992

The Parenting Education Needs of Women Experiencing Incarceration in South Australia: Proposal for a Mixed Methods Study

2020· article· en· W3037298302 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Belinda Lovell, Mary Steen, Adrian Esterman, Angela Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Government
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)ScholarshipMultimethodologyQualitative researchMedical educationPsychologyMedicineSociologyPedagogyPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The mother-child relationship is extremely important, and for mothers experiencing incarceration, this relationship has unique challenges. There is limited evidence currently available to identify the type and content of parenting education that would best suit women who are incarcerated. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to design and evaluate a parent education program for women experiencing incarceration in South Australia. The program must meet the specific needs of incarcerated women and considers the cultural needs of Aboriginal and or Torres Strait Islanders and migrant women. Hereafter Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples will be referred to as Aboriginal; the authors acknowledge the diversity within Aboriginal cultures. METHODS: This study will utilize a mixed methods approach, including six phases framed by a community-based theoretical model. This methodology provides a collaborative approach between the researcher and the community to empower the women experiencing incarceration, allowing their parenting education needs to be addressed. RESULTS: A scoping review was undertaken to inform this study protocol. This paper describes and discusses the protocol for this mixed methods study. Recruiting commenced in December 2019, results will be published in 2020, and the project will be completed by August 2022. This project has been supported by a Research Training Scholarship from the Australian Government. CONCLUSIONS: The scoping review highlighted a lack of rigorous evidence to determine the most appropriate parenting education program to suit women experiencing incarceration specifically, and there was little consideration for the cultural needs of women. It also became clear that when quantitative and qualitative data are utilized, the women's voices can assist in the determination of what works, what will not work, and what can be improved. The data collected and analyzed during this study, as well as the current evidence, will assist in the development of a specific parenting education program to meet the needs of women experiencing incarceration in South Australia and will be implemented and evaluated as part of the study. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/18992.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.208
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2080.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.008
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0060.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.346
GPT teacher head0.623
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis→French-language works237,207→