MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104010893 · doi:10.1080/15548732.2020.1835784

Attempting to operationalize a multi-dimensional definition of permanency in child welfare practice: results from a demonstration project

2020· article· en· W3104010893 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Burge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Child Welfare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationCornerstoneWelfareIndigenousFoster careNursingChild protectionService (business)PsychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceLawBusinessEpistemologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Permanency has been a cornerstone concept in child welfare since the 1960s. Despite its endorsement as a best practice principle in promoting the wellbeing of children in child welfare care, debate persists about the key elements of the concept and their effects, particularly in relation to the emphasis on legal permanency when children in care cannot be reunited with their parents. This article describes results from a demonstration project using a Family Finding service model. It aimed to operationalize a multi-dimensional permanency definition where most of the children served were Indigenous.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public Child WelfareSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207