The protective role of internal/external factors on Covid-19 related stressors among resource parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Covid-19 pandemic has had detrimental effects on almost everyone worldwide, but one particularly vulnerable group are resource parents (foster and kinship) and the young people in out-of-home care. Resource parents have experienced the same increases in pandemic-related stressors as other parents but have the added challenge of caring for a young person involved with child welfare. There are, however, various possible protective factors that have been found to positively influence families during times of stress. Methods: We examined how internal (family functioning/resilience and emotion regulation) and external (parent/child welfare worker relationship and social supports) resource parent protective factors are related to the degree of perceived stressors experienced due to the pandemic. A sample of 47 resource parents from the province of Ontario (Canada) caring for a young person between 4 and 17 years old completed an online questionnaire. Results: Multiple regression analyses showed that a higher quality relationship between resource parents and child welfare workers was associated with lower perceived pandemic-related stressors. Higher parent emotion regulation was also found to be associated with a significant decrease in resource parents’ perceived stressors. Conclusion: Overall, resource parents experienced an increase in pandemic-related stressors. However, both internal and external protective factors could be associated with a decrease in experienced stressors. Impact: This study used a strengths-based approach and showed the importance of a positive resource parent and child welfare worker relationship as well as effective parental emotion regulation strategies during times of stress.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".