MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401167894 · doi:10.32674/jtse.v2i2.5669

Helpline-Informed Approaches to Remote Learning Needs for Students at Risk of Maltreatment

2023· article· en· W4401167894 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robin Ortiz, Rachel Kishton, William J. Powers, Michelle Fingerman, Jodi Hall, Joanne M. Wood, Laura Šinko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Trauma Studies in Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHelplinePsychologyMedical educationMedical emergencyMedicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remote schooling during the COVID-19 pandemic offered a window into unique concerns regarding student well-being, particularly for students lacking a safe and supportive home environment. We sought to identify school-related concerns voiced by youth under age 25 who reported distress to a hotline via text or chat while in remote school during the pandemic. Qualitative thematic analysis was conducted on 60 transcripts. Help-seekers were an average age of 15.4 years (range: 10-21 years), from 25 states and Canada, and mostly female (57%). Our results yielded five student concerns: feeling trapped, school as escape, isolation, distress from parental schoolwork enforcement, and accommodation challenges for students with disabilities. We identified needs regarding novel methods for abuse reporting, social support, and access to services for student mental health, students with disabilities, and parents. This work demonstrates the importance of incorporating the voices of vulnerable youth in interventions to support students during remote learning.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Trauma Studies in EducationSame topicCardiac Arrest and ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207