Functional analysis screening for inappropriate mealtime behavior
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Inappropriate mealtime behavior (IMB) is a class of food refusal behavior that is commonly observed in children with neurodevelopmental disorders or avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder. An abundance of research has demonstrated that IMB is commonly maintained by negative reinforcement in the form of escape from food or drink presentation. Given the common association between IMB and escape as a reinforcer, more efficient methods of conducting functional analyses have been called for. The present study examined the extent to which indirect assessments and a functional analysis screening process reliably predicted an escape function in three children with autism spectrum disorder who engaged in IMB. The results of the two assessments were then compared to a standard functional analysis. For all participants, the functional analysis identified an escape function, which corresponded with both the indirect assessment and screening. Additionally, within‐session analyses of screening sessions further validated the screening process. The functional analysis screening of IMB is discussed in terms of its efficiency, practicality, and experimental design. The results of this study offer a framework for efficiently assessing the function of IMB, while providing recommendations for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it