The Practice of the Nobody's Perfect Parenting Program: In the Trial of a Privately Owned Café
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates into the effect of the Nobody's Perfect program to be held at a café. This program was practiced for mothers that had infants, 4 times from May 2009 through June 2010. Nobody's Perfect (NP) is a parenting education and support program for parents of children from birth to age five. It was developed by Health Canada and introduced nationally in 1987. NP is offered by a trained facilitator, or co-facilitators, to small groups of parents in weekly sessions over a six to ten week period. It has been practiced in Japan since 2004. It was held 372 times during 2008 throughout Japan. Most NP programs have been carried out by local administrative organizations. Therefore this study used the staffs of the café to plan and carry out the NP program. As a result, participants of NP had self-confidence and developed the skills on childcare. In addition, it became easy for them to come and use the café's galleries and extra rooms after closing the program. It shows that it is easy for them to make networks.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".