MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185592976 · doi:10.1177/00302228211033661

Parental Death During Adolescence: A Review of the Literature

2021· review· en· W3185592976 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Farella Guzzo, Gabriella Gobbi

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietyPsychological interventionDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMental healthPopulationAddictionPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While extensive research exists on parental loss in childhood and the related psychological interventions, little has been done in the adolescent population. Adolescence is a particular phase of life characterized by a singular psychological, emotional, neurological, and endocrinological development, paralleled by the process of self-affirmation and an opening toward social relationships. This complex neuropsychological phase should thus be understood independently from children and adults. The objective of this work was to review the literature studying the impacts of parental loss in adolescents. The current review identified a wide range of behavioral and emotional responses to parental death in adolescence, including depression, suicidal ideations, anxiety, insomnia, addiction and impaired function at school and home. The role of peers, school life, and family and social environment are important for the recovery from loss. More studies are required to better understand the different psychological trajectories in adolescence after parental death and tailor mental health interventions accordingly.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations54
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207