MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412106754 · doi:10.2196/70797

Influence of Personal Traits, Social Relationships, and External Resources on the Development of Emotional Resilience in Children From East London: Protocol for an Observational Accelerated Longitudinal Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4412106754 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francois van Loggerenberg, Milena Nikolajeva, Daniele Porricelli, Imogen I. Hensler, Aisling Murray, Eleanor Keiller, Julia Michalek, Dennis Ougrin, Jennifer Y. F. Lau

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychological resilienceMental healthOperationalizationStrengths and Difficulties QuestionnairePopulationDevelopmental psychologyLongitudinal studyPsychopathologyChild developmentCohortEmotional well-beingLife course approachClinical psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Emotional resilience is a dynamic process by which individuals may prevent, overcome, and thrive following challenging events. Emotional resilience can be defined as absence of negative outcomes (ie, symptoms of psychopathology) and/or the presence of adaptive outcomes (ie, well-being). Despite the wealth of research tracking the nature of and contributions to emotional resilience in adolescence and adulthood, there is a dearth of evidence on the nature of resilience and its development during preadolescent childhood despite this being an important preventative period for later mental health difficulties and a period when emotional experiences change. OBJECTIVE: Our primary study objectives are 3-fold: to explore how preadolescent children growing up in deprived areas of London may operationalize resilience, evaluate whether there are differences in the development or trajectories of resilience among our target population, and understand what contributes to resilience pathways over time. Additionally, our research aims to better understand the psychometric properties of resilience measures used in a preadolescent sample and assess the feasibility of developing a longitudinal cohort study of preadolescent children in East London. METHODS: We will conduct an accelerated longitudinal cohort study in primary schools across the broad geographical area of East London. The multimethod approach will span across 3 data collection arms: (1) child cognitive tasks and psychometric questionnaires in classroom settings, (2) teacher ratings, including teacher assessments of school mental health provisions, and (3) parent questionnaires. We aim to recruit approximately 1200 children aged 7-11 years at baseline across UK school years 3, 4, and 5. Our measures will span themes of resilience and mental health, as well as personal, social, and community resources available to the children. We will collect quantitative data via questionnaires from children, their parents, and school staff. We will collect qualitative data from the children through paper-based tasks. RESULTS: Study recruitment commenced in October 2022 and continued till December 2023. Baseline testing commenced in October 2022 and continued till December 2023; 873 students were enrolled at baseline. Follow-up is anticipated to continue at least annually until June 2027. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess the feasibility of conducting a longitudinal cohort study on preadolescent children in East London. Alongside evaluating the psychometric properties of resilience measures used in this age group, this study will explore how resilience develops in children across time and relate this to other outcome measures. By identifying how personal, social, and community resources may affect resilience in preadolescent children, we will enhance the understanding of how emotional resilience develops in preadolescent children, and future studies will be able to develop interventions to boost resilience by targeting young and diverse populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN12430839; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12430839. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/70797.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.006

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 head0.465
GPT teacher head0.586
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207