MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4319603145 · doi:10.9734/bpi/rhdhr/v1/18307d

Epidemic of False Diagnoses of Autism

2023· book-chapter· en· W4319603145 on OpenAlexaff
David L. Rowland

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismPsychiatryMedical diagnosisClinical psychologyPopulationPsychologyAutism spectrum disorderMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to determine the reason for rapidly escalating diagnoses of autism. In 2018, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that 1 in 44 children were diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder, for a prevalence rate of 2.27% of the population. In 2012, a review of global prevalence of autism found 62 cases per 10,000 people, for a prevalence rate of 0.62 percent. This apparent 266 percent increase in autism prevalence is in stark contrast to all other disorders listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), for which there has been no increase in prevalence over this same six-year period. The increase in alleged autism prevalence from 0.62 to 2.27 percent is entirely due to the DSM-5 creation of a false and overly broad autism spectrum (ASD) catch-all category that includes conditions unrelated to autism. These figures suggest that 70% of those who have been given an ASD diagnosis may not be autistic. What the psychology professions urgently require is a causal based definition of autism, as recommended in this report. Autism is an inherent neurophysiological difference in how the brain processes information and is caused by a dysfunctional cingulate gyrus (CG), that part of the brain which focuses attention.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.004

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research→French-language works237,207→