MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404115024 · doi:10.1002/car.2905

Consequences of parental neglect of academic performance Brazilian child

2024· article· en· W4404115024 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Abuse Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeglectPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The negative effects of child neglect on the development of children are serious and have far‐reaching negative consequences for children, especially in Brazil, with great social inequality. The research investigated the consequences of neglect for children in their early years of schooling. The academic performance was evaluated in three groups: children with formal notification of neglect, children with suspected unreported neglect and children who did not suffer any form of abuse. Information was collected from different sources: parents/caregivers, teachers and the children themselves. The groups comprised children in their early school years, aged between six and eight. The results showed that neglected children had borderline or clinical levels of school skills and below‐average school performance. The reference group had, for the most part, normal scores and average or above‐average school performance. Considering that school is a protective factor, children with learning difficulties and neglected children need support that favours child development.

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 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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.358 · 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