MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050173466 · doi:10.3109/17518423.2012.676101

Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with Angelman syndrome after 1 year of behavioural intervention

2012· article· en· W2050173466 on OpenAlexafffund
Jane Summers

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster Children's Hospital
FundersHamilton Health Sciences
KeywordsAngelman syndromeIntervention (counseling)CognitionPsychologyRandomized controlled trialClinical psychologyPediatricsMedicinePhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of teaching approaches based on the principles of applied behaviour analysis (ABA) on neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with Angelman syndrome (AS). METHODS: A non-randomized pre-test-post-test control group design was used. The intervention group consisted of four children with AS aged 3.1-9.2 years. Controls were other children with AS who were individually matched on the basis of chronological age, gender and molecular sub-type. Children in the intervention group were provided two-to-three ABA-based therapy sessions per week over a 1-year period. Standardized measures of cognitive, adaptive and language functioning were administered at baseline and after 1 year. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups at baseline or after 1 year. However, positive trends were observed in the intervention group for some cognitive and adaptive measures. CONCLUSION: ABA-based intervention improved aspects of neurodevelopment for some children with AS and warrants further study.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207