MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391659901 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs144202421720

NAVIGATING “SAFETY” IN A PANDEMIC: A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF ONTARIO CHILD WELFARE SAFETY INTERVENTIONS FOR NEWCOMER PARENTS AND OTHER FAMILIES DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2024· article· en· W4391659901 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Daniel Kikulwe, Sarah Maiter

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Psychological interventionWelfareH1n1 pandemicMedicineVirologyPsychologyNursingPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated circumstances surrounding the impact of COVID-19 on child protection investigations, particularly those affecting newcomer parents in Ontario, Canada. Recognizing that the pandemic inflicted substantial socioeconomic disadvantage on some people, the purpose of the study was to use an intersectional lens to examine challenges and solutions found by child welfare agencies when working with families. Insights for policy and practice are drawn from 11 virtual interviews with child welfare workers and managers in Ontario. Our findings reveal that some newcomer families encountered unique challenges: ineligibility for the available pandemic public assistance; inaccessibility to faith-based supports, which had often been their first key contact for mental wellness in the past; technological inequities; and language barriers. These intersecting conditions impacted newcomer families and led to innovative child protection interventions. Analysis of the interview data shows a gradual shift in Ontario from risk-focused approaches to supportive and preventative child welfare interventions in families. Furthermore, supervisors faced the dilemma of how stringently to enforce ongoing safety policies when some social workers were questioning the benefits of these rules for families with intersecting identities who were experiencing added burdens because of the pandemic.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0330.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207