MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100519449

Integrated early childhood program participation, parenting and child development outcomes: The Toronto First Duty Project. [Thesis

2009· article· en· W7100519449 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarly childhoodContext (archaeology)Child developmentSocial ecological modelChild careSocial environmentDay careEmpirical researchConceptual framework
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined predictors of program participation and the potential effects of participation on child development in five school sites offering integrated preschool services as part of the Toronto First Duty (TFD) demonstration project. The TFD model offered a seamless, school-based ‘service community ’ integrating childcare, kindergarten, family literacy, and other early childhood services. Despite sound conceptual arguments for the utility of integrating early childhood services, no empirical studies have examined the relation between uptake of integrated preschool services and children’s developmental outcomes, within the ecological context of integrated services. This study examined program participation levels or ‘dosage’, while considering the social ecology of the child, including family and school level characteristics that may moderate or mediate the effectiveness of community-level service integration efforts to improve child outcomes during the transition to school. The ecology of participation effects was examined through generalized linear modeling techniques analyzing a linked dataset (N=272) including: (1) systematic intake form and

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207