MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203417546 · doi:10.1111/jcpp.13521

Editorial Perspective: Prato Research Collaborative for change in parent and child mental health – principles and recommendations for working with children and parents living with parental mental illness

2021· editorial· en· W3203417546 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Reupert, Penny Bee, Clemens Hosman, Karin van Doesum, Louisa M. Drost, Adrian Falkov, Kim Foster, Lina Gatsou, Brenda Gladstone, Melinda Goodyear, Anne Grant, Christine Grové, Sophie Isobel, Nick Kowalenko, Camilla Lauritzen, Darryl Maybery, Elaine Mordoch, Joanne Nicholson, Charlotte Reedtz, Tytti Solantaus, Kristin Stavnes, Bente Weimand, Scott Yates, Torleif Ruud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2021
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFamily Support in Illness
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental illnessPerspective (graphical)Psychological interventionMental healthPsychologyMental health serviceService (business)PsychiatryDevelopmental psychologyMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children whose parents have mental illnesses are among the most vulnerable in our communities. There is however, much that can be done to prevent or mitigate the impact of a parent's illness on children. Notwithstanding the availability of several evidence-based interventions, efforts to support these children have been limited by a lack of adequate support structures. Major service reorientation is required to better meet the needs of these children and their families. This editorial provides recommendations for practice, organisational, and systems change.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0210.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.024

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.376 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicFamily Support in IllnessFrench-language works237,207