Bibliographic record
Abstract
Until the 1990s, the roles that children and young people undertake in providing informal family care received virtually no academic or policy recognition. If awareness of these children did exist, they were generally referred to as “young carers,” although different countries have different phrases (for example, “young caregivers” in the United States or “children who are next of kin” in Norway). Despite a number of definitions in use, most have the following in common: young carers are young people under eighteen years old who provide care, assistance, or support to another family member, often on a regular basis. They take on significant or substantial caring tasks and levels of responsibility that would usually be associated with an adult. The person receiving care is often a parent but can be a sibling, grandparent, or another relative with a disability who has some chronic illness, mental health problem, or condition requiring care, support, or supervision. More and more conceptual research work shows the importance of “having a common definition” of (young) carers to facilitate their identification as well as to have a common basis in research. Many definitions emphasize the negative outcomes that caring has on children (for example, restricted social and educational opportunities). The United Kingdom has the most extensive body of research and publications on young carers and is the most advanced country in terms of policy responses and legal provision, with a track record of twenty years of research, fifteen years of specific government legislation, and a national network of hundreds of services. Apart from a few other countries (including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, and France), most nations and governments have not engaged in identifying and supporting young carers, even though it is likely that 2 to 4 percent of all children take on caring roles within their families. An older group of carers, aged eighteen to twenty-four, are now being referred to as “young adult carers.” This article discusses both groups. A distinction is made here between carers who are under the age of eighteen (“young carers”) and those who are between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four (“young adult carers”) because both groups are at a different developmental stage in their lives and “career” as carers. One group consists of those legally considered “children”; the other, those legally considered “adults.” Although both groups have experiences and needs that are similar, they have important differences that require separate identification and discussion. Moreover, in terms of governmental policy and services, young carers are generally the responsibility of children’s services, whereas young adult carers are the responsibility of adult services (in the United Kingdom, they are the responsibility of adult health and social care services). This distinction has major implications for the delivery of services and interventions for young carers, young adult carers, and their families.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".