Investigating the structure of the restricted, repetitive behaviours and interests domain of autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Restricted, Repetitive Behaviours and Interests (RRBIs) are represented in the DSM-IV and measured by the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) as one of the three homogeneous symptom categories of Pervasive Developmental Disorders. Although this conceptualisation is well accepted in the field, the grouping of symptoms is based primarily on clinical judgment rather than on empirical evidence. METHODS: The objective of this study was to examine the factor structure of the RRBI domain of autism. Eleven items from this domain of the ADI-R were used in a Principal Components Analysis (PCA). Our sample consisted of 339 individuals with a Best Estimate diagnosis of Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD). RESULTS: Findings indicate that the RRBI domain is composed of two distinct factors or dimensions: Insistence on Sameness (IS) and Repetitive Sensory and Motor Behaviours (RSMB). RSMB is negatively correlated with adaptive skills; that is, lower functioning individuals tend to have higher levels of repetitive sensory and motor behaviours. On the other hand, IS is positively correlated with autistic symptoms in the communication and language domain. Further analyses suggest moderate familial aggregation among affected sibling pairs within the IS but not the RSMB factor. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence for the heterogeneity of the RRBI domain of the ADI-R in terms of both clinical presentation and other correlates. In addition, the IS factor seems to be under familial (presumably genetic) control, while RSMB appears to simply reflect variation in developmental level.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".