MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404045374 · doi:10.1080/08927936.2024.2418700

Initial Psychometric Evaluation of a Service Dog Attraction Assessment Grid for Youth With ASD and Related Disorders

2024· article· en· W4404045374 on OpenAlexafffund
Geneviève Goulet, Nathe François, Noël Champagne, Nicolas St-Pierre, Éric St-Pierre, Pierrich Plusquellec

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthrozoös · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec
KeywordsGridAttractionPsychologyService (business)Clinical psychologyApplied psychologyBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal-assisted interventions, such as the use of service dogs, represent an increasingly popular therapeutic avenue for youths with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Before engaging anyone in this type of intervention, it could be justified to assess their level of attraction to animals. However, this aspect is rarely documented, and no existing instrument suits the specific challenges of ASD clients and the reality of the clinical setting. This paper describes the use and preliminary validation of an observation-based assessment tool developed by the Mira Foundation to evaluate the level of attraction toward dogs. The 9-item scale has been used by the team throughout the evaluation process of 1,010 potential candidates for a service dog. It is designed to describe and quantify observed behaviors during a standardized encounter with a non-familiar dog. The participants were aged between 2 and 26 years old (mean age = 8.13, SD = 4.3 years) and 87% had an ASD diagnosis. A total of 323 participants were assessed by a second rater, which allowed for interrater reliability analyses on each item of the scale. The factorial structure of the scale was determined by applying an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) on one-half of the sample, followed by a cross-validation study consisting of a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the other half. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess internal consistency. Based on weighted kappa statistics, interrater reliability showed strong agreement for individual items (Kw between 0.66 and 0.85). A two-factor solution was produced with EFA and confirmed through CFA. A Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89 when items from the first factor (attitude) were combined and 0.92 for the second factor (interaction) indicated good internal consistency for the identified subscales. These findings support the reliability of this assessment tool and its potential use in clinical and research domains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.389 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthrozoösSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207