MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403679674 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxae067.022

23 Probing bias: Understanding the experiences of Black, Indigenous and People of Colour (BIPOC) caregivers for children with developmental disabilities and their involvement with child protection

2024· article· en· W4403679674 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shanthiya Nallathamby, Elizabeth Young, Thivia Jegathesan, Julia Peak, Nekeisha Jean Baptiste, Ripudaman Minhas, Shazeen Suleman, Karen Milligan

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Welfare and Adoption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDevelopmental psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In Canada and abroad, a disproportionate number of Black Indigenous and Persons of Colour (BIPOC) experience referral to child protective services (CPS). Children with developmental disabilities, including Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) and intellectual disabilities (IDD), are also disproportionately CPS-involved. Recent Canadian research has suggested that almost a quarter of children from a complex care paediatric program are CPS-involved, however there is no known research for ASD/IDD populations seen in a general paediatric clinic. Further, intersections of race/ethnicity and ASD/IDD and CPS involvement have not been examined. Objectives We are conducting a mixed methods study to explore the intersections of race, developmental disabilities and involvement with CPS for our paediatric population. Design/Methods Phase 1: We completed a retrospective cohort study of 349 patients (0-18 years of age) who were seen by a paediatrician and social worker at a large, hospital-based paediatric clinic in Toronto, Canada in 2019. Electronic medical record data was reviewed and the following binary variables (yes/no) coded CPS-involved or referral made, 1+ caregiver identify as BIPOC, and primary language of caregiver(s) not English. Results Preliminary analyses indicate that 11.7% of our sample is CPS-involved. Contrary to over-representation of BIPOC families in the general CPS population, we found that the proportion of families involved with CPS was lower for BIPOC than non-BIPOC families. A similar pattern was observed for primary language, with a trend towards caregivers who reported English as a second language being less likely to be CPS-involved. In our presentation, we will present analyses regarding the type and intensity of CPS involvement and include other demographic characteristics of the family. These findings will be interpreted with findings from Phase 2 (currently underway), which explores lived experiences of 40 caregivers involved with CPS drawn from Phase 1. Conclusion Within an ASD/IDD patient sample, BIPOC families were less likely to be involved with CPS than non-BIPOC families. This finding is in stark contrast to provincial rates that suggest a 2.2 times greater likelihood of CPS-involvement for Black youth. While these results on the surface suggest equity, they may still reflect bias. It is possible that the concerns of BIPOC families are being downplayed in comparison to non-BIPOC families, reducing their access to supportive services.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.869

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicChild Welfare and AdoptionFrench-language works237,207