Understanding Repetitive Behaviors and the Use of Exercise as an Intervention for Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder and an Intellectual Disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repetitive behaviors (RBs) are a primary characteristic of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). There are various ways of defining RBs, and a number of factors can influence the appearance of these behaviors. Repetitive behaviors are related to a decrease in adaptive functioning for people with ASD. Additionally, 31% of people with ASD are diagnosed with an intellectual disability (ID). Due to the rising prevalence, lifelong impairments, and increased complexity that accompany ID and the strain on caregivers/family members, it is important to assess potential RB interventions for adults with ASD and ID. Previously investigated interventions for RBs include pharmacological approaches, response blocking, response interruption and redirection, antecedent-based interventions, and sensory integration. Exercise as an intervention has been documented to reduce the number of RBs for people with ASD and improve on-task behavior. The available evidence suggests that the best exercise interventions for people with ASD are vigorous in intensity, aerobic (i.e., jogging), and individually focused. Overall, this review explores the current literature on RBs and how exercise has been implemented as an intervention for adults with ASD and ID.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".