MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400773427 · doi:10.18357/ijcyfs144202421840

EXPLORATION OF MARITAL RELATIONSHIP PROJECTS AMONG PARENTS OF A CHILD WITH AN INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY

2024· article· en· W4400773427 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Simon Fortin, Lise Lachance, Louis Cournoyer, Hugo Lamirande-Landry, Suzie McKinnon, Louis Richer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual disabilityPsychologyMarital relationshipDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parental stress in parents of a child with an intellectual disability may have an impact on their marital relationship. Achievement of marital projects is considered an important factor that sustains marital satisfaction and fulfils the need for relatedness essential to well-being. In this study, which explores marital relationship projects (MRPs) of these parents, 34 couples participated individually in semi-structured interviews using the personal projects analysis grid. In their 5 most important projects, 17 mothers and 17 fathers prioritized at least 1 MRP: mothers in particular reported that they wanted to spend more time with their partners, while fathers wished for opportunities to travel as a couple. The thematic analysis of parents’ appraisals of their MRPs gave rise to 4 categories: “determined optimists”, “determined sceptics”, “postponing optimists”, and “postponing sceptics”. Furthermore, 4 types of conjugal dynamic emerged: “continuity”, “when the time is right”, “it’s getting necessary”, and “it’s complicated”. Gaining knowledge about these parents’ MRPs and how they are appraised will make it possible to offer support and resources that will allow them to pursue their MRPs, leading to more fulfilled relationships.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Child Youth and Family StudiesSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207