MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2882997534 · doi:10.1080/09297049.2018.1490706

Initiation of joint attention and related visual attention processes in infants with autism spectrum disorder: Literature review

2018· review· en· W2882997534 on OpenAlexafffund
Martina Franchini, Vickie Armstrong, Marie Schaer, Isabel M. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Neuropsychology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsJoint attentionPsychologyDisengagement theoryAutism spectrum disorderAutismIntervention (counseling)Developmental psychologyVisual attentionCognitive psychologyCognitionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) represents a group of neurodevelopmental disabilities that can be difficult to identify before the age of 2 or 3 years, the age when the full range of behavioral symptoms has emerged in most cases. Initiation of joint attention is an important developmental function in which impairments are already observable before the second birthday and can predict children's ASD symptomatology. In the first part of this review, we summarize results pertaining to retrospective studies of initiation of joint attention in children with ASD and prospective studies of infants at high risk for ASD during the first 2 years, when this behavior is becoming more complex in terms of frequency, quality, and variety. We will also discuss the implications of impairments in dyadic engagement, a precursor of joint attention behavior, for the early development of joint attention. Finally, the early development of initiation of joint attention has been related to specific visual attention mechanisms such as social orienting and visual disengagement. In the second part of this review, we provide an overview of the relationship between those visual attention mechanisms and subsequent social-communication impairments. Clinical and research implications of these findings for both early detection and early intervention will be discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild NeuropsychologySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207