The Impact of Ideal and Real Discrepancies of Family Functionality Perception over the Quality of Life in a Minority Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The perceived discrepancies of adolescents regarding family functionality (the real vs. the ideal) and how it predicts their mental and physical quality of life are tested. A cross-sectional study using questionnaires was conducted. Roma adolescents (N = 139) with ages ranging from 12 to 17 years participated. Out of all, 38% are boys and 61,5% are girls. Results show that mental quality of life is predicted by family cohesion and family adjustment and suggest a nonlinear relation for physical quality of life. The discrepancy between the real and ideal levels of family cohesion determines adolescent’s mental quality of life. The direction of the discrepancy shows that mental quality of life is higher when the real family cohesion level is higher than the ideal one. The results suggest that both mental and physical quality of life of adolescents are predicted by family cohesion and family adjustment. People tend to thrive while having an image about themselves and they form this image by considering an ideal or a necessary way of being. Comparing the ideal to the real and present image of themselves people might experience maladjustment and could determine their mental health. The results of the study show that family cohesion and family adjustment perception of children determine their quality of life. Moreover, discrepancies between the ideal and real level are also an important determining factor for quality of life.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".