Involvement of Youths with Autism Spectrum Disorders or Intellectual Disabilities in Multiple Public Service Systems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to estimate the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and intellectual disability (ID) among youths active in at least one of five public service systems - mental health [MH], educational services for youth with serious emotional disturbance [SED], child welfare [CW], juvenile justice [JJ], and alcohol and drug services [AD].This study also reports the characteristics and patterns of system involvement among these youths. Results indicate that approximately 12% of a random sample of youths involved in these public service systems had ID or ASD. These disabilities were particularly prevalent in youth in the SED (25%), MH (13%), and CW (13%) systems and were less prevalent in the JJ and AD systems (4% each). Youths with ID or ASD were more likely than other youths to be Caucasian, have a higher socioeconomic status, and be more likely to have externalizing psychiatric and other problems. Of those with ASD or ID, approximately one third were served in more than one service system, with the MH and SED systems most likely to be serving youths with externalizing psychiatric disorders. These findings have important implications for service provision, treatment planning, and workforce development.
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 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 | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it