MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4293012862

Recommendations for practice: Perspectives of students with autistic spectrum conditions and their parents concerning their inclusion in high school: a France -Quebec comparison

2018· preprint· en· W4293012862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Morgane Aubineau

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Autistic spectrumPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPedagogySociologyMathematics educationMedical educationAutismSocial psychologyMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An increasing number of students with autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) was able to attend mainstream high schools. Despite international recommendations, their own perspective is rarely taken into account in francophone research settings. Thus, 26 teenagers with ASD and their parents took part in interviews and completed questionnaires about friendship and self-representations and school process. Results show that self-perception is strongly correlated with social acceptance and physical appearance. Being driven by a passion, having a friend and receiving social skills training appear to facilitate inclusion success. Satisfying parental representations are correlated with adolescent’ prosocial behaviors, full-time job and diagnosis of ASD in parents. To conclude, transition from adolescence to adult life will constitute a major challenge for youth with ASD. Anticipation is needed to allow them to gain autonomy and practical skills to be able to speak for themselves.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.548
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)→Same topicFamily and Disability Support Research→French-language works237,207→