MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W115409629 · doi:10.1177/215416470103600208

Effects of Exercise Frequency on Stereotypic Behaviors of Children with Developmental Disabilities

2001· article· en· W115409629 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Prupas, Greg Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation and training in mental retardation and developmental disabilities · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicBehavioral and Psychological Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyAudiologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two exercise treatments were implemented, differentiated by frequency. The single frequency exercise treatment consisted of one daily ten minute walk/jog session, while the multiple frequency treatment involved three ten minute walk/jog sessions per day. Stereotypic behaviors were observed prior to the exercise sessions, as well as immediately following exercise. Subjects demonstrate a mean reduction of 51.6% in the single frequency condition. These data confirm the results of past research following a single bout of exercise. However, these positive results are usually short-lived. Thus, the mean reduction of 58.9% following the multiple frequency condition can be viewed as more effective than the single frequency condition because the reduction was maintained throughout different periods of the day. Use of a multiple frequency exercise treatment informally revealed an interaction between exercise and environment with regard to stereotypic behaviors. Observation in the classroom suggested that as the structure of the classroom increased, stereotypic behaviors decreased. Thus, exercise combined with a structured classroom is likely to yield an optimal decrease in stereotypic behaviors.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations83
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation and training in mental retardation and developmental disabilitiesSame topicBehavioral and Psychological StudiesFrench-language works237,207