Instructors’ Perspectives of Social and Motor Influences on Participation in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Participation is key to childhood development and is essential for health and well-being; yet children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) participate less in social and physical activities compared to their typically developing peers and little is known about how social and motor challenges impact participation patterns. Purpose: The current research garnered experiential insights of the quality and quantity of participation, through the lens of instructors (N = 9) working with a child or children with ASD. Method: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted to capture a comprehensive and informative profile of how social and motor functioning of children with ASD influence involvement in social and physical activities. Results: Thematic analysis revealed consistent viewpoints in four main areas: (1) Viewpoints extend beyond the World Health Organization definition of participation; (2) Participation depends on who is involved; (3) Although motivation, confidence, and competence in social/motor domains underlie participation, social challenges were perceived as the greatest barrier; (4) While acknowledging the benefits of participation, it is necessary to be cognizant of the required supports. Throughout these themes, the notion of heterogeneity was made very clear. Conclusion: Collectively, perspectives offer descriptive insight which may be useful when designing opportunities for participation in social and physical activities among children with ASD.
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 | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".