Support Needs of Fathers of Children with <scp>ASD</scp>: Individual, Family, Community and Ideological Influences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Fathers are increasingly involved in caring for children, and involvement by fathers of children with ASD is distinctly impacted by added demands of their child's diagnosis. Yet supports for families of children with ASD are not tailored to needs of fathers. We use an ecological framework to examine how fathers' needs are influenced by contexts ranging from the immediacy of their child's behaviour to overarching expectations for good fathering. METHODS: We thematically analyse data from semi-structured interviews with 28 fathers of children with ASD who shared parenting stories of navigating their immediate and broader environments. FINDINGS: Fathers are responsive and reflective in their parenting and value recreationally based support activities that include their children. Fathers endorse father-to-father support and are interested in mentoring fathers newer to the experience of having a child with ASD. CONCLUSIONS: Fathers are resourceful parents who compel a critical re-examination towards advances in father-friendly practices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".