Prevalence of Out-Of-Home Care Among School-Aged Children in Canada, 2002–2018: An Analysis of Nationally-Representative Student Survey Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The objectives were to estimate the prevalence of out-of-home care among school-aged children in Canada by year, gender, age group, and placement type and assess time trends. Methods: We analyzed data from five cycles of the Health Behaviour in School-aged Children survey. Respondents were students in grades six through ten attending public schools in Canada. Based on a question about the family structure, we derived three types of living arrangements - (1) foster/children's home, (2) kinship home, or (3) living with a parent(s) - and estimated the prevalence of each type. Results: The pooled sample included 93,720 students; 1.1% reported living in a foster/children's home and 2.1% in a kinship home and in 2018. At the p = 0.05 level (chi-square), there were no observed differences in prevalence by gender or age group. Over time, the prevalence of living in a kinship home increased more than foster/children's home (average percent change per cycle of 18.5% versus 5.0%), to 2.9% and 1.1%, respectively, in 2018. Conclusions: The prevalence of out-of-home care in Canada was higher that previous estimates based on census and administrative data.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".