Predicting termination from behavioral consultation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to investigate whether parental perceptions of the emotional, behavioral and social skills functioning of children with conduct problems, differed for parents who completed the behavioral consultation process (N = 40) compared to those who prematurely withdrew ( N = 11). A series of between group analyses were conducted to examine whether parental perceptions existed. Parents who prematurely withdrew from the behavioral consultation process reported significantly greater incidences of anxious and depressed behavior in children, than parents who remained in consultation F(1,49) = 4.24, p = .0448. Similarly, using the Wilks' criterion, overall estimates of emotional and behavioral functioning, combined with social skills functioning were also significantly affected by group membership, F(3,47) = 3.22, p = .0310. Using the same variables in a logistic regression analysis, a test of the full model with all three predictors compared to the constant only model was statistically reliable phi2 (3, N = 51) = 10.26, p = .0336, indicating that the predictors, as a set, reliably distinguished the perceptions of those who completed the consultation process, compared to those who prematurely withdrew. This model accurately predicted 77.7% of parents' group membership. The results of the study will be discussed in terms of their usefulness for future consultants to identify families at risk for prematurely withdrawing from the consultation process, so that additional resources can be offered to encourage their continued participation in the consultation process.
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 | 0.003 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".