MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390971571 · doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdae001

Navigating family chronicles: a critical reflection on grandparents’ influence on grandchildren’s mental well-being

2024· article· en· W4390971571 on OpenAlexaff
Sean Marta Efastri, Dwi Sri Rahayu, Setyorini Setyorini, Devi Afriyuni Yonanda, Bernardus Widodo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandalaGrandparentLibrary scienceVocational educationSociologyPsychologyHistoryPedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dear Editors, An article written by Padilah entitled ‘Grandparenting as therapy: how does it enhance resilience and mental well-being among older adults?’ claims that grandparenting not only enriches the emotional lives of older adults, but also serves as cognitive training and improves their coping mechanisms.1 Many studies hold similar opinions.2,3 However, few have captured the impact of grandparents caregiving on grandchildren’s mental health. Among the complex interplay of family dynamics, the role of grandparents in shaping the mental well-being of their grandchildren is a nuanced exploration. As times change, the wisdom and experience of older generations may not always align with the changing landscape of modern parenting. This narrative dives into critical reflections on the impact of grandparents influence on the mental resilience and development of their grandchildren. The experience and wisdom passed on from grandparents can be a source of stability in the lives of grandchildren. The importance of the bond between grandparents and their grandchildren is one of the driving factors for the good development of grandchildren.4 The warmth and care provided by grandparents is invaluable.5 It was found that shared leisure activities play an important role in strengthening relationships with the adult generation and are a means of transmitting values.6 However, in an era of rapid social change, grandparents may struggle to understand the contemporary needs of their grandchildren. Differences in worldview and values between generations7 can create conflict, potentially affecting the mental health of younger family members. Energy availability and physical deficits8 as well as negative emotions9 of grandparents can be barriers to providing needed support. Modern challenges such as technology, social media,10 academic turmoil11 and mental health12 can also be difficult for older generations to cope with, creating gaps in emotional parenting approaches. There are several potential consequences of grandparents care for grandchildren. Social isolation when grandchildren interact more in the family environment. The absence of interaction with peers and biological parents can impact the social and emotional development of the child.13 Even long-term behavioural impacts are experienced by children raised by their grandparents. It has been noted that grandchildren raised by foster grandparents have worse mental/behavioural problems compared with those raised by their parents during their teenage years.14 Grandparent caregiving has a complex impact on grandchildren’s mental health, with both positive and negative colours involved. The challenges that arise in this dynamic emphasize the need for a balance between tradition and openness to changing times. By forging positive interactions that combine the wisdom of grandparents’ heritage and adaptation to modern developments, we form a strong foundation for the mental health of generations to come. We have no conflicts of interest to disclose. The authors declared that no funding was received for this paper.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.013
Scholarly communication0.0090.015
Open science0.0030.013
Research integrity0.0050.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.367 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public HealthSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207