The Impact of Aquatic Exercise on Sleep Behaviors in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) often demonstrate disturbed sleep behaviors that negatively impact daytime behavior. The purpose of this study was: 1) To determine if participation in aquatic exercise improves sleep duration in children with ASD, and 2) to examine the social validity of the intervention. A within-subjects crossover design over an 8 week period was used. Participants were assigned to the intervention (aquatic exercise 2x/ week for 1 hour) or the control (no exercise) condition for 4 weeks; they then switched conditions for 4 weeks. Sleep habits were recorded using the EMFIT QS sleep monitor. The IRP-15 was administered to parents after completion of the intervention to establish social validity. Mean sleep duration for intervention versus control was compared using the Wilcoxon-Signed Ranks Test. Statistically significant improvements (p=0.012) in sleep duration were observed (intervention: 9.27 hours vs control 8.37 hours). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze IRP-15 data indicating the majority of parents strongly agreed that aquatic exercise had a positive effect on their child’s sleep. Results suggest that participation in an aquatic exercise program may lead to improved sleep duration in children with ASD, and is a socially valid intervention.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".