The impact of COVID-19 restrictions on parent-child conflict and mental health among children in tertiary mental health care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study focused on children treated for mental health problems during the pandemic. We examined how parent’s difficulties in managing COVID-19 restrictions increased children's behavioral problems (internalizing and externalizing) and parent-child conflict through parental mental health and parental stress. Family functioning, particularly problem-solving ability, was tested as a resilience factor. Data were collected using online surveys from 337 parents with a child between the ages of 4 and 18 years who was receiving active outpatient mental health treatment at a pediatric tertiary care center. Parents who reported a greater impact of COVID-19 reported more behavioral difficulties in their children. This relationship was significantly mediated by parental mental health (general stress, anxiety, and depression) and parental stress. Similar indirect pathways were observed when examining internalizing and externalizing problems in children, where the most significant pathway had parental stress as the sole mediator. Furthermore, the effect of COVID-19 impact on parent-child conflict through parental stress was significantly moderated by problem-solving skills within the family. Parental stress mediates the impact of COVID-19 on parent-child conflict. Interventions that improve family problem solving-skills may decrease the effect of parental stress on parent-child conflict.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".