MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407580913 · doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcaf026

Social Work with Young People in Care: Looking After Children in Theory and Practice, 2nd Edition. Nigel Patrick Thomas and Karen Winter

2025· article· en· W4407580913 on OpenAlexaff
Darrell Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal of Social Work · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial careGerontologySociologyPsychoanalysisPsychologyMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The textbook covers a number of essential topics that will be of benefit to social work students as well as practitioners who work with children and young people in care. I found it a very enjoyable read. As someone who has worked in the practice areas covered in the book (and now living in Canada), it's interesting to compare policy and legislation, review how things are different, and see how things have developed in terms of practice in the countries of the UK. The content of the book, except for perhaps legislation and policy (for obvious reasons), is very appropriate for social workers and students in many countries. For example, ethics, rights, the UNCRC, and practice were all highlighted as fundamental to working with the cultural and societal variations in families and communities. These variations are explored in detail and, while specific to the UK context, still have resonance in other international jurisdictions. The UNCRC articles were also used to frame and underpin the understanding of practice issues such as the use of attachment theory, assessment, and the vital importance of relationships and resiliency in this work, again relevant to an international audience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.008

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal of Social WorkSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207