Parental Factors Moderate the Association Between COVID-19 Disruption and Adolescent Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Past work shows that COVID-19 impacted adolescent mental health, but the moderating role of parental factors remains unclear. Ninety-one parent-adolescent dyads (ages 12-15) completed online surveys. Parents reported on COVID-19 disruption within their household, their mental health, parental reflective functioning (i.e., ability to consider the mental state of their child), and their adolescent's emotional and behavioural difficulties. Adolescents rated their own emotional and behavioural difficulties and perception of parental support. Positive associations between household COVID-19 disruption and adolescent difficulties emerged, regardless of informant. However, parental factors linked to adolescent difficulties varied by informant. Parental reflective functioning moderated the association between COVID-19 disruption and adolescent difficulties (parent-report). COVID-19 disruption showed some stronger associations with adolescent difficulties than other parental stress measures, but not consistently. Findings replicate and extend prior work, emphasizing the negative association between COVID-19 disruption and adolescent mental health, while highlighting parental reflective functioning's potential for mitigating adolescent difficulties.
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 | 0.010 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".