MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387692854 · doi:10.1007/s10578-023-01621-x

Parent Involvement in Mental Health Treatment for Autistic Children: A Grounded Theory-Informed Qualitative Analysis

2023· article· en· W4387692854 on OpenAlexafffund
Victoria Chan, Carly Albaum, Nazilla Khanlou, Henny A. Westra, Jonathan A. Weiss

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Psychiatry & Human Development · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenYork University
FundersIODE CanadaSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaKids Brain Health NetworkYork UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSinneave Family Foundation
KeywordsPsychologyMental healthGrounded theoryCognitionPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologyQualitative researchClinical psychologyAutismPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for many autistic children experiencing mental health problems, and parents are particularly involved in their psychotherapy. This study presents a conceptual framework of successful parent involvement in CBT for autistic children. Seventeen therapists (94% female) and 11 mothers were interviewed about their involvement in a CBT program for autistic children ages 8-13 years. The conceptual framework depicts how parent involvement varies depending on child, parent, and environmental factors. Parents' contributions to therapy were grouped into five main roles. Parents' beliefs and attitudes toward therapy also influenced their involvement. This is the first study to empirically investigate how parents of autistic children contribute to the therapeutic process in CBT.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.359 · 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChild Psychiatry & Human DevelopmentSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207