MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127530180 · doi:10.3389/fhumd.2020.615865

A Perspective on Reprioritizing Children’s’ Wellbeing Amidst COVID-19: Implications for Policymakers and Caregivers

2021· article· en· W3127530180 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shakti Chaturvedi, Thomas Enias Pasipanodya

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Dynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychosocialGovernment (linguistics)Quarter (Canadian coin)StorytellingPublic relationsPerspective (graphical)Political sciencePsychologySocial media2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEconomic growthMedicinePsychiatryEconomicsNarrativeGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present work presents an analytical and investigatory view of the existing issues regarding COVID-19 with attention to children and their overall well-being during the second quarter of 2020. The authors conducted an extensive content analysis of media reports, government briefings, social platforms, and provide some recommendations to the policymakers and care providers for building more robust responses for the pandemic affected children. The article contributes to the existing field of study in the following ways. Firstly, the present manuscript describes the impact of COVID-19 on the psychosocial health of children. Secondly, the authors offered some outcome-based responses to policymakers and caregivers to mitigate the negative impact of the pandemic on COVID affected families and children. Thirdly, the article highlights the importance of social media, the role of storytelling, and using the concept of mandalas in handling the pandemic affected sensitive sections of the society. Lastly, the authors furnish some response initiatives to combat the novel COVID-19 pandemic based on real-world observations. These initiatives can influence policymakers as well as help caregivers to design efficient and adequate response programs for the pandemic affected children.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human DynamicsSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207