The neurocognitive profiles of justice involved people with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) is highly prevalent in criminal justice settings. Despite increased awareness of the neurocognitive deficits among justice-involved individuals with FASD, no systematic evaluation of the literature in the field has been conducted to date. We aimed to conduct a systematic review of the literature on the neurocognitive profiles of justice-involved individuals with FASD, by searching five key electronic databases, dissertations database, and Google scholar, up to January 2021. The findings indicate that when contrasted with comparison groups, justice-involved individuals with FASD display significant impairment in a greater number of neurocognitive domains including intellectual capacity, executive function, language, academic achievements, motor skills, and adaptive living skills. The relatively small number of the studies included in the review, along with the confounding effects of comorbidities among study participants, precludes drawing firm conclusions about the true extent and implications of neurocognitive deficits in this population. To advance the field further, there is an urgent need to conduct robust studies involving larger samples of justice-involved individuals with FASD and suitable comparison groups. Advancing knowledge in the field can have important implications for understanding of the antecedents of offending behaviour in this population, and informing strategies for early identification and intervention.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".