Impact of Separation Anxiety on Vulnerability of Children without Parental Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study examined the impact of separation anxiety on the vulnerability of children without parental care. Parenting is no doubt one of the most tedious, diverse, and complex jobs to execute, and when it goes wrong, it affects society deeply. Parents are the first form of protection for their children, and when the roles are not executed, it tends to affect the child’s moral and psychological abilities. Separating children from their loved ones and/or familiar environments has a great impact on the developmental milestones of such children. Separation anxiety is a required distress-response to being separated from one’s caregivers during infancy, which is critical to the child’s emotional or psychological development. Regardless of the fact that some children develop coping strategies to regulate how they react to this distress, others hardly handle it, and it affects their behaviors and how they react to things. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) suggests that bringing up a child under the care of a parent or close relative is of great help to the child. However, children who are not privileged to have such opportunities are subjected to negligence and severe vulnerability. Some of the factors that contribute to child vulnerability include, but are not limited to, disability, parents’ educational level, and mental health status. Therefore, this commentary aims to investigate the previous empirical studies and other psychological implications and triggers of vulnerability in children without parents. It suggests that, apart from the physical and socio-economic challenges faced by children without parents, some psychological challenges (e.g., separation anxiety) predispose them to being vulnerable.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".