Functional difficulties in children and youth with autism spectrum disorder: analysis of the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study examined the prevalence of functional difficulties and associated factors in Canadian children/youth aged 5 to 17 years diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2019 Canadian Health Survey on Children and Youth (CHSCY), a nationally representative survey of Canadian children/youth that used the Washington Group Short Set on Functioning (WG-SS) to evaluate functioning in six daily tasks. For each functional domain, binary outcomes were derived (no/some difficulty, a lot of difficulty/no ability). We used logistic regression to identify associations between demographic characteristics, educational experiences, and perceived mental and general health and the most common functional difficulties, namely those related to remembering/concentrating, communication and self-care. All estimates were weighted to be representative of the target population. The bootstrap method was used to calculate variance estimates. RESULTS: Analysis of the records of 660 children/youth with ASD revealed that the most common functional difficulties were remembering/concentrating (22%; 95% CI: 18-27), communicating (19%; 95% CI: 15-23) and self-care (13%; 95% CI: 10-17). Lower perceived mental health was associated with increased functional difficulties with remembering/concentrating. ASD diagnosis at a lower age and lower perceived general health were associated with increased functional difficulty with communication. Parental expectations for postsecondary education were associated with decreased functional difficulty for self-care. CONCLUSION: One or more functional difficulties from the WG-SS was present in 39% of Canadian children/youth aged 5 to 17 years with ASD. Functional difficulties with remembering/concentrating, communication and self-care were most common.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".