A systematic review of training programs for parents of children with autism spectrum disorders: Single subject contributions
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
AIM: The purpose of this systematic review was to examine research utilizing single subject research designs (SSRD) to explore the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase parents' ability to support communication and social development in children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). METHOD: Included studies were systematically assessed for methodological quality (Logan et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2007) and intervention effects. Data examining participant characteristics, study methodology, outcomes, and analysis were systematically extracted. RESULTS: Eleven SSRD parent-training intervention studies examining 44 participants with ASD were included. Overall, the studies were of moderate quality and reported increases in parent skills and child language and communication outcomes. INTERPRETATION: The results supported by improvement rate difference (IRD) analysis indicated several interventions demonstrated positive effects for both parent and child outcomes. However, limited generalization and follow-up data suggested only one intervention demonstrated parents' accurate and ongoing intervention implementation beyond training.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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