Raising Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders in Monolingual vs Bilingual Homes: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of children in Canada and the United States are raised in bilingual family homes. Current recommendations for typically developing children are to encourage and support bilingual exposure in the home; however, there are no specific guidelines for families of children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs), a disorder in which communication deficits are considered a hallmark feature. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to present a scoping review of studies that compare cognitive, linguistic, and behavioral outcomes for children with ASDs raised in monolingual vs bilingual homes. METHODS: A systematic search of 6 databases for peer-reviewed literature and gray literature search through dissertation databases, conference archives, and reference lists of pertinent studies was conducted. RESULTS: Nine studies were included. No consistent differences were observed in the categories of core ASDs behaviors, cognitive function, or language. The studies suggest a potential bilingual advantage on nonverbal intelligence quotient scores, adaptive functioning, and expressive vocabulary. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence of a detrimental effect of raising children with ASDs in a bilingual home.
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 | 0.006 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".