MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981885351 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz117

Standards of diagnostic assessment for autism spectrum disorder

2019· review· en· W2981885351 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jessica Brian, Lonnie Zwaigenbaum, Angie Ip

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
FundersPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsReferralAutism spectrum disorderMedicineMultidisciplinary approachAutismIntervention (counseling)Family medicinePediatricsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rising prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has created a need to expand ASD diagnostic capacity by community-based paediatricians and other primary care providers. Although evidence suggests that some children can be definitively diagnosed by 2 years of age, many are not diagnosed until 4 to 5 years of age. Most clinical guidelines recommend multidisciplinary team involvement in the ASD diagnostic process. Although a maximal wait time of 3 to 6 months has been recommended by three recent ASD guidelines, the time from referral to a team-based ASD diagnostic evaluation commonly takes more than a year in many Canadian communities. More paediatric health care providers should be trained to diagnose less complex cases of ASD. This statement provides community-based paediatric clinicians with recommendations, tools, and resources to perform or assist in the diagnostic evaluation of ASD. It also offers guidance on referral for a comprehensive needs assessment both for treatment and intervention planning, using a flexible, multilevel approach.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.359 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations116
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207