MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402532383 · doi:10.1002/jaba.2912

On the efficacy and efficiency of treating pediatric feeding disorder

2024· review· en· W4402532383 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

VenueJournal of Applied Behavior Analysis · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionExtinction (optical mineralogy)PsychologyIntervention (counseling)Meta-analysisDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inappropriate mealtime behavior (IMB) is a type of feeding challenge within the broader class of food refusal. The purpose of this study was to critically analyze the efficacy of interventions for the treatment of IMB through a meta-analysis of research using single-case experimental designs. We examined the extent to which different interventions resulted in decreases in IMB while also producing increases in food acceptance. This meta-analysis was also used to examine the efficiency of different interventions in achieving clinical significance. We identified 38 studies involving 266 cases in which IMB was treated with a behavioral intervention. The results indicated interventions that combined escape extinction and non-escape extinction had greater effect sizes for both reducing IMB and increasing food acceptance than either escape extinction alone or non-escape extinction alone. However, interventions that included escape extinction were slightly less efficient at decreasing IMB than were interventions that did not include escape extinction. We discuss the implications of these findings and provide 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 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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.318 · 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