Caregiver mental health and school-aged children’s academic and socioemotional outcomes: Examining associations and mediators in Northern Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While there is a strong link between caregiver mental health, caregiver engagement, and child development, limited research has examined the underlying mechanisms of these associations in Africa. We examined the mediating role of dimensions of caregiver engagement in the association of caregiver psychological distress with children's academic and socioemotional outcomes in Ghana. Data came from 4,714 children (aged 5-17 years) and their caregivers in five regions of northern Ghana. Caregiver psychological distress and engagement (i.e., engagement in education, emotional supportiveness, and parenting self-efficacy) were self-reported by children's primary caregiver. Children's academic (literacy and numeracy) and socioemotional (prosocial skills and socioemotional difficulties) outcomes were directly assessed using validated measures. Structural equation modelling was used to estimate mediation models. We tested moderation by caregiver exposure to formal education, child's age, and child's sex. Fourteen percent of caregivers experienced elevated psychological distress. Higher levels of psychological distress were associated with children's poorer literacy and numeracy skills, and higher socioemotional difficulties, but not prosocial skills. The mediating role of caregiver engagement varied by caregiver exposure to formal education but not child's age or sex. Caregiver engagement in education explained the association between psychological distress and children's literacy skills (but not numeracy or socioemotional) in families where the caregiver had no formal education (indirect effect: β = 0.007 [95% CI: 0.000, 0.016]), explaining 23% of the association. No mediator explained the association of psychological distress with child outcomes among families where the caregiver had some formal education. The mechanisms through which caregiver psychological distress is associated with child outcomes in rural Ghana differ as a function of caregivers' exposure to formal education. These results highlight the importance of developing multi-component and culturally-sensitive programs to improve child outcomes. Further research in similar contexts is needed to advance scientific understanding on how to effectively promote child and family wellbeing.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".