MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605716357 · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12728

Randomised trial of a parent‐mediated intervention for infants at high risk for autism: longitudinal outcomes to age 3 years

2017· article· en· W2605716357 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilKing's College LondonAutisticaNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWaterloo FoundationKing’s College LondonWellcome TrustSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustAutism Speaks
KeywordsAutismIntervention (counseling)ProdromeAutism Diagnostic Observation SchedulePsychologyRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionClinical psychologyAutism spectrum disorderPediatricsDevelopmental psychologyMedicinePsychiatryPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There has been increasing interest in the potential for pre-emptive interventions in the prodrome of autism, but little investigation as to their effect. METHODS: A two-site, two-arm assessor-blinded randomised controlled trial (RCT) of a 12-session parent-mediated social communication intervention delivered between 9 and 14 months of age (Intervention in the British Autism Study of Infant Siblings-Video Interaction for Promoting Positive Parenting), against no intervention. Fifty-four infants (28 intervention, 26 nonintervention) at familial risk of autism but not otherwise selected for developmental atypicality were assessed at 9-month baseline, 15-month treatment endpoint, and 27- and 39-month follow-up. PRIMARY OUTCOME: severity of autism prodromal symptoms, blind-rated on Autism Observation Schedule for Infants or Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule 2nd Edition across the four assessment points. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: blind-rated parent-child interaction and child language; nonblind parent-rated communication and socialisation. Prespecified intention-to-treat analysis combined estimates from repeated measures within correlated regressions to estimate the overall effect of the infancy intervention over time. RESULTS: Effect estimates in favour of intervention on autism prodromal symptoms, maximal at 27 months, had confidence intervals (CIs) at each separate time point including the null, but showed a significant overall effect over the course of the intervention and follow-up period (effect size [ES] = 0.32; 95% CI 0.04, 0.60; p = .026). Effects on proximal intervention targets of parent nondirectiveness/synchrony (ES = 0.33; CI 0.04, 0.63; p = .013) and child attentiveness/communication initiation (ES = 0.36; 95% CI 0.04, 0.68; p = .015) showed similar results. There was no effect on categorical diagnostic outcome or formal language measures. CONCLUSIONS: Follow-up to 3 years of the first RCT of a very early social communication intervention for infants at familial risk of developing autism has shown a treatment effect, extending 24 months after intervention end, to reduce the overall severity of autism prodromal symptoms and enhance parent-child dyadic social communication over this period. We highlight the value of extended follow-up and repeat assessment for early intervention trials.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.347 · 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