MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386878153 · doi:10.1177/13591045231202875

“It opened a new door for me”: A qualitative study of forcibly displaced parents’ experiences of an attachment-based parenting program

2023· article· en· W4386878153 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Kristen, Marlene M. Moretti, Fatumo Osman

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAttunementThematic analysisPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyGeneral partnershipFocus groupQualitative researchUnderpinningSocial psychologySociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study was to explore forcibly displaced parents’ experiences of how an online attachment-based parenting program ( eConnect) impacted their relationships with their teens. Data was collected from four focus group discussions with 28 parents who participated in the eConnect program. Data was analyzed using network thematic analysis. A global theme emerged from the analysis: Strengthened Parent-Teen Relationships. Four underpinning organizing themes described the process through which the parent-teen relationship was strengthened: Knowledge Served as the Foundation for Change, Increased Parental Self-Efficacy, Improved Emotional Attunement Facilitates Dyadic Affect Regulation, and Shifted Power Dynamics and Emerging Mutual Parent-Teen Partnership. Findings suggest that eConnect is promising intervention for strengthening parent-teen relationships and supporting forcibly displaced 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.567
Teacher spread0.456 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207