An Assessment of Abuse of Children with Disabilities at Japanese Nursery Schools: Reports by Commissioned Pediatricians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In a preschool setting, childcare is usually provided to children with disabilities or potential features as well. In this study, we hypothesized that parents might have additionally consulted commissioned pediatricians when their children were reportedly abused by schoolteachers as well as following legitimate grievance procedures. Aims: To estimate the prevalence rate of children with disabilities being abused at nursery schools in Japan, the authors asked the help of commissioned pediatricians of nursery schools. Methods: We sent a questionnaire to 1,607 members of the Japanese Society for Well-being of Nursery-schoolers, who are specialists known to be highly sensitive to abuses. Incident reports from the second half of 2012 to the fiscal year 2014 were collected from 361 members who replied. Results: In total, three respondents, including one pediatrician, had received a complaint(s) from parents that their child with disabilities had been abused by a teacher. No details on each case were provided. Conclusion: Thus, the need for another assessment to administrative was indicated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".