Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although parent-adolescent and peer-adolescent relationship quality are critical for adolescent wellbeing during typical stressful life events, the unique features of the COVID-19 pandemic put into question whether strong parent-adolescent and peer-adolescent relationship quality functioned as protective factors of adolescent mental health in this context. The current longitudinal study examined a community sample of adolescents across 3 time points, each 6 months apart (Time 1: Fall, 2019; <i>n</i> = 163, 50.9% male; mean age = 15.75 years, SD = 1.02). Results showed that increases in depression symptoms, perceived stress, and emotion dysregulation from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020 were predicted by changes in parent, but not peer relationship quality. The current study demonstrates that adolescent-parent relationship quality may be protective against mental health difficulties during the COVID-19 pandemic, while adolescent-peer relationship quality may not. Identifying protective factors that may play a role in mitigating the impact of the pandemic, and other such widespread health crises, on youth mental health is critical in reducing the long-term psychological harm of the viral outbreak, as well as promoting adolescent wellbeing and resilience.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".