MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410777933 · doi:10.1177/10443894251322200

Mandated Reporting and Child Welfare Surveillance: Protection or Subordination

2025· article· en· W4410777933 on OpenAlexaff
Darcey H. Merritt, Rachel D. Ludeke, Julie Halverson, Jai’ Chewe, Usha Kaul

Bibliographic record

VenueFamilies in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social Services · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHomelessness and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsSubordination (linguistics)WelfareChild protectionBusinessPolitical sciencePsychologyCriminologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing attention to racism embedded in child protective services (CPS) in the United States, mandated reporting laws remain entrenched in historically racist systems and policies. The potential biases of mandated reporters coupled with their failure to consider the sociopolitical and socioeconomic contexts of Black families continue to shape decisions to report and investigate families for possible child abuse and neglect. Black parents avoid interacting with people compelled to report out of an abundance of caution, the threat of professional penalties, or inattention to biases. Employing mixed methods, this phenomenological study design elicited the lived experiences of Black mothers impacted by CPS in the United States. Participants completed a qualitative, voice-recorded electronic survey about the impact of surveillance related to child neglect. Deductive analyses resulted in identified themes related to the impact of mandated reporting.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.080
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.209

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.080
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.025
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamilies in Society The Journal of Contemporary Social ServicesSame topicHomelessness and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207