Social and motor skills of children and youth with autism from the perspectives of caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to explore social and motor impairments of children with autism through the perspectives of their caregivers. Social and motor deficits among people with autism are well documented. There is support to suggest a reciprocal relationship between social and motor deficits among people with autism, in that social deficits can act as a barrier to motor skill development and motor deficits can act as a barrier to social skill development. Design/methodology/approach This study explored social and motor impairments of children with autism through the perspectives of eight caregivers of children with autism. Findings Many salient findings emerged from the interviews conducted with caregivers, particularly concerning the social and motor development of their children. The relationships between their children’s social and motor deficits were also highlighted. Research limitations/implications 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. Originality/value To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to investigate motor and social deficits of children with autism from the caregivers’ perspectives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".