MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1603806859 · doi:10.1177/0883073815601500

Early Infant Development and Intervention for Autism Spectrum Disorder

2015· review· en· W1603806859 on OpenAlexaff
Lori‐Ann R. Sacrey, Jeffrey Bennett, Lonnie Zwaigenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderAutismIntervention (counseling)PsychologyPsychological interventionClinical psychologySpectrum disorderPsychiatryPediatricsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to overview recent findings on early detection/diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders, as well as clinical trials of early interventions for toddlers at risk for/diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. FINDINGS: Prospective studies of infants at high risk of autism spectrum disorder have yielded significant advances in understanding early development in autism spectrum disorder. Findings from prospective studies indicate that abnormalities in social communication and repetitive behaviors emerge during the second year, whereas additional "prodromal features" (motor and sensory abnormalities) emerge in the first year. Subsequently, exciting progress has been made in establishing the efficacy of autism spectrum disorder-specific interventions for toddlers as young as 15 months. Finally, efforts occur to characterize autism spectrum disorder-specific characteristics in genetic syndromes with concurrent autism spectrum disorder symptomatology. CONCLUSION: Substantial progress in characterizing early developmental trajectories as well as the identification of specific behavioral markers has aided early detection. Work remains to ensure that research findings are translated into clinical practice for uptake in the health care system.

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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations110
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207