MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388970362 · doi:10.1080/07317107.2023.2284700

Do Maternal Internalizing Problems Influence Treatment Outcomes in Group-Based vs. Individualized Child Behavior Management Interventions?

2023· article· en· W4388970362 on OpenAlexaff
Leslie E. Roos, Kayla M. Joyce, Brendan F. Andrade

Bibliographic record

VenueChild & Family Behavior Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyClinical psychologyAnxietyPsychological interventionCoping (psychology)Developmental psychologyGroup psychotherapyConduct disorderTreatment and control groupsPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coping Power (CP) is an evidence-based manualized group therapy targeting child conduct problems at the family level. We examined maternal-internalizing problems (e.g., depressive and anxiety symptoms) as a predictor of treatment response for children with disruptive behavior when comparing group treatment (CP) versus non-standardized individualized treatment. Ninety-three mothers participated. CP was similar or better than individual treatment for families with maternal-internalizing problems. Marginally significant improvements in child conduct problems and inconsistent discipline were found among mothers in CP with internalizing problems. Findings highlight the potential efficacy of CP for child and parenting needs among families with maternal-internalizing problems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 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 venueChild & Family Behavior TherapySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207