Repetitive and restricted behaviours and anxiety in autism spectrum disorder: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder defined by persistent deficits in social functioning and the presence of restricted and repetitive behaviours (RRBs). RRBs refer to four subtypes of behaviour including repetitive movements, speech, or use of objects; insistence on sameness; restricted interests; and sensory processing abnormalities. Many individuals with ASD also experience anxiety, which compounds ASD-related difficulties and inhibits daily functioning. RRBs have been found to be positively associated with anxiety; however, our understanding of the interplay between RRB subtypes and anxiety remains unclear. Thus, the current review aims to clarify the association between RRBs and anxiety by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: To identify relevant studies, we will search five databases: CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Scopus. Articles included in the review will have their titles, abstracts, and full texts reviewed by two independent authors and their methodological quality assessed via the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analyses will then be conducted to calculate the pooled association between RRB subtypes and anxiety. Sensitivity analyses will also be conducted to assess the potential impact of bias, missing data, outliers, and methodological differences on this relationship. Additionally, this review will collate the factors which may influence the anxiety-RRB relationship to help identify who is most vulnerable to developing anxiety. DISCUSSION: This will be the first review to examine the association between the four subtypes of RRBs and anxiety in individuals with ASD. Understanding this relationship, and the factors associated with this, may help clinicians understand the different underpinnings and presentations of anxiety within this population with potential implications for assessment and treatment. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020185434.
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 | 0.059 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.005 |
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.
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".