Effects of Integrative Autism Therapy on Multiple Physical, Sensory, Cognitive, and Social Integration Domains in Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A 4-Week Follow-Up Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the effects of conventional autism therapy (CAT) and integrative autism therapy (IAT) in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A convenience sample of 24 children with ASD was recruited and underwent either CAT or IAT for 60 min/day, twice a week, for 20 sessions over 10 weeks. Outcome measures included the following: (1) physical domain (pediatric balance scale, PBS), (2) sensory domain (short sensory profile), (3) cognitive domains (functional independence measure, FIM; and childhood autism rating scale), and (4) social integration domain (Canadian occupational performance measure, COPM; short falls efficacy scale; and pediatrics quality of life questionnaire). Two-way repeated analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the intervention-related changes in the four domains across the pre-test, post-test, and follow-up test at p < 0.05. ANOVA showed significant interaction effects on the PBS, FIM, and COPM (p < 0.05) variables. Moreover, time main effects (p < 0.05) were observed in all four domain variables, but no group main effect was noted. This study provides promising evidence that IAT is more effective than CAT for managing children and adolescents 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".