Treating obsessive compulsive behavior and enhancing peer engagement in a preschooler with intellectual disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intellectual disability (ID) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by impairments in cognitive and adaptive functioning in social, practical, or conceptual domains. Individuals with ID present with higher‐order repetitive behaviors such as a need for sameness, ritualistic, and compulsive behaviors. Often referred to as obsessive compulsive behaviors (OCBs), these behaviors increase in prevalence between 2 and 5 years of age. The present study evaluated an exposure‐based behavioral intervention for decreasing OCBs and concomitantly increasing play skills in a 4‐year‐old boy with mild ID in an inclusive preschool setting. Using a multiple baseline across behaviors design, the intervention was associated with a decrease in target behaviors and an increase in the duration of peer social engagement, with results maintained at 3‐week follow‐up. The intervention consisted of exposure and response prevention with function‐based components. Procedures including prompting and reinforcement were generalized to parent and teacher mediators. This study provides preliminary support for the use of an exposure‐based behavioral intervention to treat OCBs in children of preschool age with 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".