Factors associated with therapy non-completion for children with problematic sexual behaviors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Children with problematic sexual behaviors (PSBs) can benefit, along with their parents or caregivers, from specialized therapeutic services to limit the manifestation of these behaviors. However, for some families, mobilization for therapy represents a significant challenge since a considerable proportion do not complete the therapy intended for them. The present study aims to identify the factors associated with therapy completion, thus allowing a deeper understanding of how to support children and more broadly families to complete their therapeutic process. Methodology: The sample consists of 67 caregiver-child dyads referred to a specialized Center offering PSBs-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, actively involving the caregiver. Standardized questionnaires were administered to children and their caregiver before and after the therapy. Results: While non-completers represent 31% of our sample, they present very similar profiles to completers in terms of socio-demographic characteristics, behavior problems and symptoms. However, they appear to differ regarding living situations and coping mechanisms. Results show that children who complete therapy are more likely to live in a placement situation, compared to non-completers. Children who completed therapy also report using more coping strategies that aim toward getting social support and less distancing coping strategies than non-completers. Non completers also reported feeling less maternal support compared to completers. Discussion: Results underline the importance of implementing mobilization efforts for families with children with PSBs, along with a focus on developing efficient coping mechanisms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".