MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992642957 · doi:10.1080/08990220802388263

A Back Door Approach to Autism and AAC

2008· review· en· W1992642957 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAugmentative and Alternative Communication · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of British Columbia Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmentative and alternative communicationAutismPsychologyIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionLiteracyIntellectual disabilityCognitive psychologyGross motor skillAutism spectrum disorderDevelopmental psychologyMotor skillPedagogyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conventional view is that most individuals with autism or pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) have no significant motor impairments but do have severe intellectual disabilities. These assumptions impact the nature and types of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions that are typically provided, which tend to be narrowly focused on basic, functional communication skills such as requesting. However, recent research has provided evidence that challenges these assumptions and suggests the potential of intervention approaches targeting motor, language, and literacy development. The author encourages practitioners and researchers to examine current assumptions about autism and to invent and investigate new ways to support people with autism to communicate.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.242 · 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