MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100593528 · doi:10.17759/autdd.2020180301

Activity Employment in Autism: Reflections on the Literature and Steps for Moving Forward

2020· article· en· W3100593528 on OpenAlexaff
David Nicholas

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism and Developmental Disorders · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismRelevance (law)Field (mathematics)PsychologyWork (physics)Supported employmentPublic relationsApplied psychologyBusinessPolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reflecting an address given at the Autism Challenges and Solutions International Conference in Moscow in April 2019, this paper reviews selected studies within the author’s program of research as well as selected literature addressing pathways to employment for adults with autism. A range of employment support programs are considered, representing promising approaches. Attention is given to environmental elements that appear to have a bearing on individual employment experience and outcomes. These elements point to a person in environment approach which is increasingly supported by emerging evidence. This approach is conveyed as the employment ecosystem, with constituent elements that include the individual (employee or potential employee), family, employer, co-workers, work setting, community services, and embedded labor, health and disability policy. These various components of the ecosystem offer relevance in terms of understanding employment options and experiences of autistic adults. Recommendations for advancing this field are offered.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0110.025
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0090.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutism and Developmental DisordersSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207