MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2535560923 · doi:10.1002/aur.1683

Research needs and priorities for transition and employment in autism: Considerations reflected in a “Special Interest Group” at the International Meeting for Autism Research

2016· review· en· W2535560923 on OpenAlexaff
David Nicholas, Sandy Thompson‐Hodgetts, Lonnie Zwaigenbaum, Leann E. Smith, Paul Shattuck, Jeremy Parr, Olivia Conlon, Tamara Germani, Wendy Mitchell, Lori Sacrey, Margot E. Stothers

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism Research · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent and Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreAlberta Bible CollegeUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismScrutinyAutism spectrum disorderFocus groupPsychologyMedical educationSpecial Interest GroupService (business)Qualitative researchService delivery frameworkInclusion (mineral)Public relationsDevelopmental psychologyPolitical scienceMedicineSociologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research related to supports for adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is under-developed. As an example, system and service development to support successful transition to adulthood and meaningful vocation for adults has received relatively little research scrutiny until recently, with practitioners and program developers lacking evidenceinformed approaches guiding service delivery. A Special Interest Group (SIG) was convened at the International Meeting for Autism Research in May 2014 and May 2015, with a focus on transitional and vocational issues in ASD. The SIG consisted of 120 international delegates, including self-advocates, family members, researchers, program and policy developers, practitioners, and interdisciplinary ASD trainees. Following a summary of the literature, subgroups of attendees were convened in smaller groups to identify research needs and priorities. International researchers facilitated these discussions with notes taken in each subgroup. Using a qualitative analytic approach, key themes across groups were identified. These key themes, outlined in this paper, address the identified need to (a) advance research capacity; (b) build employer capacity relative to employing persons with ASD; and (c) enhance support resources for adults with ASD and their families. Heightened research activity guiding practice and policy, community/employer engagement, and person and family-centered services were recommended. Implications for advancement and implementation are offered. Autism Res 2017, 10: 15-24. © 2016 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.569
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.041 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutism ResearchSame topicAdolescent and Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207