MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102961379 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs114202019941

DEINSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE CHILD CARE SYSTEM IN LITHUANIA

2020· article· en· W3102961379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jolanta Pivorienė

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Issues in South Africa
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationScope (computer science)PoliticsChristian ministrySocial securityProcess (computing)Political scienceQualitative researchPublic administrationPublic relationsSociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reform of the child care system in Lithuania started with the Ministry of Social Security and Labor approving the Strategic Guidelines for Deinstitutionalization in 2012, followed by the Transition from Institutional Care to Community-Based Services in 2014. The strategic aim of the reform was to create a system including a comprehensive range of services that would enable every child and their family or guardians to receive individual services as well as community assistance according to their needs. The process of transformation of institutional care was designed in two steps: creation of the necessary conditions for the transformation, which took place in 2014 to 2017, and development of infrastructure in the regions, planned for 2017 to 2020, but now extended to 2023. The goal of this article is to discuss the deinstitutionalization process by presenting legal regulations, information about the conceptualization and scope of the project, and evidence based on documents and statistical and secondary data analysis. I will also discuss possible contradictions between analytical and political discourses, and quantitative and qualitative evidence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicLegal Issues in South AfricaFrench-language works237,207