Programmes promoted on police service websites to safeguard autistic individuals in Ontario, Canada: an inductive content analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study (1) explores what programmes police services promote for autistic individuals on their websites and (2) describes how autistic individuals are constructed in the information about these programmes. Design/methodology/approach All 53 official police service websites in Ontario, Canada, were examined to determine which programmes were promoted for autistic individuals. Inductive qualitative content analysis was used to identify and describe how autism was constructed in the information about the programmes. Findings About 64.8% of police services in Ontario, Canada, promoted at least one programme to autistic individuals and their caregivers. These programmes included Vulnerable Person and Autism Registries, MedicAlert™ and Project Lifesaver™. Autistic individuals were described as vulnerable using medicalised and tragic narratives of autism. Originality/value Autistic individuals and caregivers have suggested several interventions to improve police-autistic individual encounters. Little is known about which interventions police services have adopted and which representations of autism are used to describe autistic individuals.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".