MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401101080 · doi:10.1080/20473869.2024.2380947

Digital interventions using mobile technologies for life skills development of learners with autism spectrum disorder: a scoping review

2024· review· en· W4401101080 on OpenAlexaff
Genevieve R. Villamin, Rocci Luppicini

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Developmental Disabilities · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderPsychologyPsychological interventionAutismDevelopmental psychologyMobile technologyMobile deviceWorld Wide WebComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing essential information for digital health human-computer interaction designers, this scoping review identified the most utilized features of digital evidence-based interventions in prototyped mobile technologies for autism spectrum disorder (ASD), to lay the groundwork for designing user-focused mobile assistive technologies for learners with ASD. The review systematically categorized the features and capabilities of mobile applications that teach, support, and maintain life skills. Synthesizing and analysing 42 studies using thematic analysis, it was found that mobile applications hold the potential to support the uniqueness and varying needs of learners with ASD. This is achieved through personalization in the user interface and user experience, coupled with customizations on learning content. The scoping review also found that mobile applications can assist learners with ASD by breaking down tasks into smaller steps, incorporating pictures, illustrations, videos, sounds, pre-recorded instructions, and just-in-time prompting. In a broader context, mobile technologies can not only enhance life skills learning but also contribute to routine-building for individuals with ASD. This is possible if interventions taught in school are continued at home and integrated with daily home activities, aiming to enhance learning, daily practice, and maintenance of life skills. Future work focuses on making evidence-based interventions readily available and accessible to learners, parents, caregivers, and educators to support the overall well-being of learners with ASD.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.325 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Developmental DisabilitiesSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207