MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206611508 · doi:10.1007/s42448-021-00097-3

Examining the Prospects for Developing a National Child Maltreatment Surveillance System in Ireland

2021· article· en· W3206611508 on OpenAlexaff
Donna O’Leary, Olive Lyons

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Child Maltreatment Research Policy and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Abuse and Trauma
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersIrish Research CouncilUniversity College CorkIrish Research eLibrary
KeywordsIrishGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Child abuseChild protectionPlan (archaeology)Political sciencePoison controlSuicide preventionMedicinePublic relationsEnvironmental healthNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Irish Government pledged to reducing the prevalence of child maltreatment under the WHO Regional Committee for Europe plan on reducing child maltreatment. As a first step towards a rights-based and public health approach to maltreatment prevention, the WHO plan recommends making child maltreatment more visible across the region, with better surveillance through the use of national surveys that use standardized, validated instruments. We review the policy context, present current Irish data holdings, and outline some of the complexities reported in the literature concerning various surveillance methods in the context of the proposal to establish and maintain a surveillance system for child maltreatment in Ireland. Conclusions highlight the need for Ireland to adopting an approach to surveillance as soon as it is feasible. The paper outlines how such a programme is necessary to address the current absence of evidence on which prevention policies can be developed and to compliment the current child protection system. Drawing on a review of current methods in use internationally, we outline options for an Irish child maltreatment surveillance programme.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Child Maltreatment Research Policy and PracticeSame topicChild Abuse and TraumaFrench-language works237,207