A cognitive-behavioral intervention for emotion regulation in adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders (ASD) have difficulties in social communication; thus, these individuals have trouble understanding the mental states of others. Recent research also suggests that adults with ASD are unable to understand their own mental states, which could lead to difficulties in emotion-regulation. Some studies have reported the efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in improving emotion-regulation among children with ASD. The current study will investigate the efficacy of group-based CBT for adults with ASD. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a randomized, waitlist controlled, single-blinded trial. The participants will be 60 adults with ASD; 30 will be assigned to a CBT group and 30 to a waitlist control group. Primary outcome measures are the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations, the Motion Picture Mind-Reading task, and an ASD questionnaire. The secondary outcome measures are the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale, the World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale 26-item version, the Global Assessment of Functioning, State-trait Anxiety Inventory, Social Phobia and Anxiety Inventory, and Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale. All will be administered during the pre- and post-intervention, and 12 week follow-up periods. The CBT group will receive group therapy over an 8 week period (one session per week) with each session lasting approximately 100 minutes. Group therapy will consist of four or five adults with ASD and two psychologists. We will be using visual materials for this program, mainly the Cognitive Affective Training kit. DISCUSSION: This trial will hopefully indicate the efficacy of group-based CBT for adults with high- functioning ASD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in The University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry No. UMIN000006236.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".