MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390631007 · doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2023.102314

Comparing the autism service needs and priorities of Indigenous and newcomer families in Canada: Qualitative insights

2024· article· en· W4390631007 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vanessa C. Fong, Janet McLaughlin, Margaret Schneider, Grant Bruno

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch in autism spectrum disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWilfrid Laurier University
FundersAutism OntarioSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndigenousAutismNonprobability samplingPopulationService (business)PsychologyCulturally appropriateMedical educationPublic relationsGerontologyMedicinePolitical scienceDevelopmental psychologyBusinessEnvironmental healthMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Indigenous Peoples and newcomers are two of the largest and fastest growing populations in Canada (Statistics Canada, 2022; Zimonjic, 2022). Yet despite this, little is known about their experiences navigating and accessing autism services for their children. Method To address this gap, the current study sought to explore the autism service needs and priorities of Indigenous and newcomer families in Canada. A total of 19 participants (9 Indigenous and 10 newcomer caregivers) were selected using purposive sampling to participate in a semi-structured interview. Results The findings revealed that Indigenous families prioritized the need for services in rural and remote areas, tailored information to their needs, and support preserving their cultural heritage. On the other hand, newcomer families emphasized the importance of peer support, quality standards for services and therapies, and support during transition periods. Similarities across both groups indicated the need for addressing the lengthy waitlists for services, which have also been reported in the general population in Canada, having services and professionals place a greater emphasis on the child’s strengths, and culturally safe services and practice. Conclusion The present findings have important implications for the design and implementation of services and supports which reflect the needs and priorities of underserved communities.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch in autism spectrum disordersSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207