MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390080683 · doi:10.1177/23969415231221516

Predictors of Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) outcomes

2023· article· en· W4390080683 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism & Developmental Language Impairments · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalYork UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAutism spectrum disorderCognitionAutismDevelopmental psychologyNonverbal communicationIntervention (counseling)Clinical psychologyGeneralizationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & aims: Although the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) has been demonstrated to be an effective intervention to teach people diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder a functional communication system, the research indicates variability in PECS outcomes across people and studies. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to explore child characteristics and treatment variables that may explain the variation in, and potentially predict, PECS outcomes. Method: A total of 22 children and youth diagnosed with autism or a related developmental disorder, all of whom scored substantially below average on standardized measures of cognitive and adaptive abilities, participated in a PECS intervention. Results: Participants who achieved high phases of PECS (≥PECS phase IIIb) differed significantly from those who mastered lower PECS phases (≤PECS phase IIIa) in terms of overall, verbal, and nonverbal mental age, matching abilities, and adaptive behavior level. Stimulus generalization was also associated with significant variation in PECS outcome. PECS outcomes could be predicted with good accuracy using a combination of these child characteristics and treatment variables. Conclusions: The findings from the current study suggest that children with relatively higher cognitive and adaptive skill levels are more likely to achieve higher phases of PECS; further, approaches to generalization training also play a role. Factors such as autism symptom severity and parental ratings of maladaptive behavior were not associated with significant differences in PECS outcomes. However, more research is needed. Implications: Gaining a better understanding of predictors of PECS outcomes is important to inform intervention, provide more accurate outcome expectations for families, and guide PECS teaching procedures. Although participants were more likely to achieve higher phases of PECS if they had a higher mental age, adaptive skill level, and matching skills, the average scores for these measures were well below those expected for same age peers. These results indicate that PECS is appropriate for use with children with clinically significant deficits in cognitive and/or adaptive abilities. Further, results suggest that even children who demonstrate more severe symptoms of autism and exhibit more challenging behavior can achieve higher phases of PECS.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.262
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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