For toddlers with autism spectrum disorders, supplementing a comprehensive intervention with interpersonal synchrony improves socially engaged imitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
### Question What is the effect of supplementing a comprehensive intervention with a curriculum targeting socially synchronous behaviour on social outcomes in toddlers with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs)? ### Patients 50 children aged 21–33 months who met Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule criteria for ASD or autism and had received a diagnosis from a clinical specialist. Children were required to have a non-verbal mental age of 8 months, no siblings with ASD and to have no known aetiology for ASD. ### Setting One research institute (Kennedy Krieger Institute Center for Autism and Related Disorders), USA; time period not stated. ### Intervention Interpersonal synchrony (IS) versus non-interpersonal synchrony (Non-IS) for 6 months. Both conditions used the Assessment, Evaluation and Programming System for Infants and Children. Non-IS involved 10 h/week in a classroom (5:3 student-to-interventionist ratio) with instructional strategies representing a continuum of adult-imposed structure including discrete trial teaching, pivotal response training and routines-based interaction. Low-tech augmentative communication systems, visual cues and visually based organisational strategies were also used. …
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".