Parent Outcomes in Group Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has been shown that having a child with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) impacts parents in many ways. However, there is limited research examining changes of these impacts over time, especially in the context of childrens intervention. This study examined changes in personal wellbeing, family quality of life, mental health issues, and parenting stress in 178 parents of children with ASD receiving a group behavioural intervention. The groups had varying levels of parent involvement, which was also considered, along with differences between mothers and fathers. Data were collected via questionnaires administered at the beginning, end, and at a 9- to 11-week follow-up of the group intervention. Overall, there were significant improvements in mental health issues and parenting stress from the beginning to the end of the group. While there were no differences between mothers and fathers with regard to changes over time, some relevant differences were noted in their baseline scores. The group with higher parent involvement showed significantly better improvements in personal wellbeing, family quality of life, and parenting stress than the lower involvement group. Possible mechanisms of change in the outcome variables were also examined. At follow-up, all gains in the outcome variables were maintained. The findings suggest that group behavioural interventions for children with ASD can have a positive impact on parents, and that groups with greater parent involvement offer even more benefit. Importantly, these changes are maintained beyond the end of the group. The mechanisms by which improvements are seen suggest aspects that could be incorporated by childrens service providers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".