MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086845316 · doi:10.1186/s40723-020-00076-0

Uptake of the child care expense deduction: exploring factors associated with the use of the child care expense deduction among families with a child under 12 years

2020· article· en· W3086845316 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Loanna Heidinger, Leanne Findlay, Anne Guèvremont

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of child care and education policy/International journal of child care and education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
FundersEmployment and Social Development Canada
KeywordsChild careGovernment (linguistics)MedicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Canadian government implemented the child care expense deduction in 1972, a policy initiative intended to offset the financial cost of child care for eligible families. Although the deduction has now been in place for almost 50 years, and almost half of all families with a child aged 0–14 years use child care (Sinha, 2014), little research has examined the factors associated with claiming the child care expense deduction. The current study examined the uptake and usage of the child care expense deduction among families with at least one child under the age of 12 in 2011. Furthermore, the family demographic and work characteristics of families who have at least one child under the age of 12 in the household were explored in terms of the characteristics associated with a higher likelihood of claiming the child care expense deduction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of child care and education policy/International journal of child care and educationSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207