How Adolescent Mothers Interpret and Prioritize Evidence About Perinatal Child Protection Involvement: Participatory Contextualization of Published Evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pregnant and parenting adolescents are more likely than adults to live with economic and social vulnerability, contributing to a higher risk of poorer maternal and newborn health outcomes. These same factors contribute to higher rates of postpartum child protection investigations among adolescents. This study describes an innovative approach to contextualize evidence on factors contributing to perinatal child protection involvement in the perspectives of pregnant and parenting adolescents. Using Weight of Evidence, an evidence-based participatory procedure, we conducted a conventional literature review and used fuzzy cognitive maps to contextualize evidence in the experiences of young mothers exposed to child protection investigations. Published evidence was contextualized through semi-structured mapping interviews with ten pregnant and parenting youth and subsequently shared with three child protection workers specialized in pre- and post-natal risk assessment. We developed and consolidated explanatory accounts describing how factors contribute to child protection involvement in the perinatal period among adolescent parents. We collaboratively designed and prioritized interventions strategies together with six adolescent parents. Young women highlighted mental health consequences of child protection involvement, including a reluctance to disclose their own health and social needs, challenges to their identity and self-confidence as parents, and social isolation. Women prioritized reducing the stigma they experience in accessing services, strengthening supportive relationships and greater understanding of their rights in child protection investigations as actionable intervention areas. Inputs of young women and service providers precipitated a reconceptualization of risk and identified how to support greater agency and self-determination among young parents experiencing child protection investigations.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".