MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387856546 · doi:10.52326/jss.utm.2023.6(3).13

QUALITY OF LIFE OF CHILDREN IN CARE INSTITUTIONS IN KINSHASA AND ITS DETERMINANTS

2023· article· en· W4387856546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan Enguta Mwenzi, Giscard Mpangi Moseseli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Social Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Scale (ratio)Quality (philosophy)PsychologyGerontologySample (material)MedicineNursingGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this research was to assess the quality of life of children placed in foster care institutions in Kinshasa, and to identify its socio-demographic determinants. It also aimed to indirectly assess the effectiveness of comprehensive care for children placed in these institutions. Against this backdrop, the McGill Quality of Life Scale was administered to a sample of 210 children placed in five care institutions in Kinshasa. The results of the study showed that the children in care had a good general, psychological, physical, existential and social quality of life. Four socio-demographic variables had a decisive influence on the quality of life of these children. These were gender, length of stay at the center, age and type of deceased parent.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Social SciencesSame topicAging, Elder Care, and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207