Characteristics of Teen Families Accessing a Supportive Housing Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a need for strength-based research that considers the complex realities of teen families. The purpose of the current study is to provide a springboard for this research by describing the characteristics of teen parents and their children involved in a supportive housing program. We used a community-based participatory research approach with a descriptive design. Teen parent participants completed self-report questionnaires about their relationship with their children, resilience, self-esteem, and parenting attitudes. In addition, the children of teen parents completed standardized assessments of their development. A total of 21 parents (18 mothers and 3 fathers) and 20 children participated. Results indicate that self-esteem and resilience are areas of difficulty for participants. In addition, most parents fell into the medium risk range with respect to the parenting attitudes measured. Of note, few parents fell into the high-risk range on most scales, suggesting that most participants have the foundation for successful parenting across the areas measured. Results also show that the majority of participants are demonstrating typical attachment, discipline practices, involvement, parenting confidence, and relational frustration. An area of particular strength for participants is their involvement with their children. It also appears overall that the children of teen parents are developing on a fairly typical trajectory that is reflective of the general population. This study reinforces the heterogeneity of teen families, with teen parents and their children showing different areas of strengths and challenges across the domains measured. Based on our findings, we discuss implications for research, policy, and practice.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".