A Snapshot of Peer Relationships in Children and Youth: Pre- Versus During COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong peer relationships are an essential component of a healthy, happy, and long lifetime. Given that there is little understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on peer relationships, this study explored the effects of the COVID waves on peer relationships for clinically referred children and youth while controlling for age, sex, and income. 11,281 children and youth between the ages of 4 and 18 years, who were receiving services from mental health agencies across Ontario from January 2018-March 2022, were assessed using the interRAI ChYMH. Chi-square tests of independence and logistic regression analysis was performed. Overall, as expected, there were significantly fewer peer relationship difficulties during COVID-19 compared to the pre-pandemic period. Despite the general decline of peer issues, individuals between the ages of 8-18, particularly males, were more likely to experience peer relationship difficulties compared to those 4-7 years old. Additionally, children from the lowest income households experienced greater peer relationship difficulties during COVID-19 when compared to those from the highest income households. The findings from this study demonstrate the nuanced changes in social behaviours due to the ongoing pandemic for children and youth and highlight those youth who are most in need of social and behavioural interventions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".