MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006691882 · doi:10.1002/aur.2276

A Conceptual Framework for Understanding the Cultural and Contextual Factors on Autism Across the Globe

2020· review· en· W3006691882 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWellcome TrustEuropean CommissionAutism Speaks
KeywordsAutismPsychologyConceptual frameworkCultural diversityCultural biasAutism spectrum disorderMental healthMultidisciplinary approachAffect (linguistics)PopulationDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyMedicinePsychiatrySocial scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autism research is heavily skewed toward western high-income countries. Culturally appropriate screening and diagnostic instruments for autism are lacking in most low- and middle-income settings where the majority of the global autism population lives. To date, a clear overview of the possible cultural and contextual factors that may affect the process of identifying and diagnosing individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is missing. This study aims to outline these factors by proposing a conceptual framework. A multidisciplinary review approach was applied to inform the development of the conceptual framework, combining a systematic review of the relevant autism research literature with a wider literature search spanning key texts in global mental health, cultural psychiatry, cross-cultural psychology, and intellectual disability research. The resulting conceptual framework considers the identification, help-seeking, and diagnostic process at four interrelated levels: (a) the expression; (b) recognition; (c) interpretation; and (d) reporting of autism symptoms, and describes the cultural and contextual factors associated with each of these levels, including cultural norms of typical and atypical behavior, culture-specific approaches to parenting, mental health literacy, cultural beliefs, attitudes and stigma, as well as the affordability, availability, accessibility, and acceptability of services. This framework, mapping out the cultural and contextual factors that can affect the identification, help-seeking, and diagnosis of ASD may function as a springboard for the development of culturally appropriate autism screening and diagnostic instruments, and inform future cross-cultural autism research directions. The framework also has relevance for clinicians and policy makers aiming to improve support for underserved autism populations worldwide. Autism Res 2020, 13: 1029-1050. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: The vast majority of autism research is conducted in western high-income settings. We therefore know relatively little of how culture and context can affect the identification, help-seeking, and diagnosis of autism across the globe. This study synthesizes what is known from the autism research literature and a broader literature and maps out how culture and context may affect (a) the expression, (b) recognition, (c) interpretation, and (d) reporting of autism symptoms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.473
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.034 · 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