Autism spectrum disorder: How can occupational therapists support schools?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND.: Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) face multiple occupational challenges in their school, and school staff need additional support to increase their participation. PURPOSE.: The aim of this study is to identify how Response to Intervention (RTI) could be used by occupational therapists to support school personnel who work with children with ASD. METHOD.: In a descriptive qualitative study, three discussion groups were undertaken with occupational therapists and school staff members in Quebec, Canada, to identify the main concerns regarding the participation of children with ASD in school activities as well as the actions to consider when attempting to increase school-related abilities. FINDINGS.: School staff members are primarily concerned with frequent outbursts and limited autonomy, along with low motivation and anxiety in children with ASD in diverse school activities and contexts. The actions identified provide guidelines for school and occupational therapist selection, the process to follow, collaborative practices, and support required. IMPLICATIONS.: A practice model is presented for occupational therapists who seek to develop school capacity to support the participation of 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".