MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527893382 · doi:10.1186/s13229-015-0019-y

Sex and gender differences in autism spectrum disorder: summarizing evidence gaps and identifying emerging areas of priority

2015· article· en· W1527893382 on OpenAlexaff
Alycia Halladay, Somer Bishop, John N. Constantino, Amy M. Daniels, Katheen Koenig, Kate Palmer, Daniel S. Messinger, Kevin A. Pelphrey, Stephan Sanders, Alison Singer, Julie Lounds Taylor, Péter Szatmári

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Autism · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersAutism Science FoundationEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentSimons FoundationAutism Speaks
KeywordsAutismAutism spectrum disorderNeuropsychologyPsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyGender disparityFoundation (evidence)MedicineDevelopmental psychologyCognitionDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most consistent findings in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) research is a higher rate of ASD diagnosis in males than females. Despite this, remarkably little research has focused on the reasons for this disparity. Better understanding of this sex difference could lead to major advancements in the prevention or treatment of ASD in both males and females. In October of 2014, Autism Speaks and the Autism Science Foundation co-organized a meeting that brought together almost 60 clinicians, researchers, parents, and self-identified autistic individuals. Discussion at the meeting is summarized here with recommendations on directions of future research endeavors.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations575
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular AutismSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207