Social and motor skills of children and youth with asd from the perspectives of caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social and motor deficits among individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are well documented. There is support to suggest a reciprocal relationship between social and motor deficits among individuals with ASD, in that social deficits prevent motor skill development and motor deficits prevent social skill development. The methods used to investigate motor and social impairments in children with ASD usually focus on quantitative methods and therefore do not provide the perspectives of caregivers. As such, this study explored social and motor impairments of children with ASD through the perspectives of eight caregivers of children with ASD using semi-structure interviews. Many salient findings emerged from the interviews conducted with caregivers, particularly concerning the social and motor development of their children. As well, the relationship between their children's social and motor deficits were also highlighted. Finally, the study discusses areas of concern that require attention. For instance, it is important that health care professionals educate parents about the consequences of motor impairments or delays and their associations with the development of social skills. As such, routine motor skill monitoring and assessments by caregivers and health care professionals should be encouraged. Future research exploring social and motor deficits in children with ASD through the caregiver perspective is warranted, as their perspectives can provide the framework needed to identify and minimize social and motor deficits in children with ASD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".