MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111453514 · doi:10.6000/1929-4409.2020.09.152

Experiences of Vulnerable Children in a South African Public Child and Youth Care Centre

2020· article· en· W3111453514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Petro van der Merwe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Criminology and Sociology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialWelfareLegislationPerceptionChild abuseChild protectionWelfare systemFoster careQualitative researchMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPsychologySociologyPoison controlPolitical scienceNursingSuicide preventionPsychiatrySocial scienceEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article reflects on community engagement as an excellent method to build upon researchers’ cumulative knowledge in a specific discipline and to demonstrate the integration of that knowledge with real-life issues. This is followed by a literature review that examines complex life situations of the interaction between parenting and child abuse, specifically between structures and child welfare systems, that capture the lines between circumstances and individual action. A phenomenological approach is adopted of descriptive qualitative nature regarding the perception of the psychosocial well-being of vulnerable children in a child and youth care centre in Tshwane, South Africa. Findings point to the nature and extent of violence against children in South Africa. As this article does not cover the complete field of the welfare system, the aim is to foster a greater understanding of this system, which might lead to better and more research on vulnerable children after being placed in a child and youth care centre. Explanations offered include legislation and coordination mechanisms, including the associated gaps and challenges.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0390.016
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0030.018
Research integrity0.0040.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Criminology and SociologySame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207