Educating for change: A meta‐analysis of education programs for separating and divorcing parents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Parent education programs have been designed explicitly for separated and divorced parents. These programs typically aim to help parents navigate the challenges of co‐parenting, reduce their children's exposure to interparental conflict, and promote their children's well‐being post‐separation and divorce. Evaluating the effectiveness of parent education programs has been challenging, given the heterogeneity of formats, duration, and settings of these programs. This meta‐analytic review aimed to complete a compressive search of relevant studies of parent education programs for separated and divorced parents. Among 40 studies, 103 treatment effects were included across education programs. The overall weighted standardized mean difference across all education programs was 0.24 (CI = 0.14, 0.34, Q = 1274.69, df : 97, p < 0.001, I 2 = 0.96.7), but these small effects were not maintained at follow‐up (ES 0.00, CI: −0.09, 0.09). Given the considerable heterogeneity across effect sizes, a meta‐regression and multiple regressions were computed to assess the influence of moderator variables. This review provides further evidence of the effectiveness of parent education programs. Implications are provided to create evidence‐based guidelines.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it