Sensory Diet Program Through In-Person and Tele-Occupationa Therapy in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a sensory processing, social communication, and occupational performance disorder. Sensory diets can have positive effects on these fields. Current research compared the effectiveness of the sensory diet program with and without teleoccupational therapy on sensory processing patterns, social competency and occupational performance in children with ASD. Materials and Methods: The study sample comprised 32 children with ASD 4-10 years old. They were placed in the control and intervention groups. The number of sessions for both groups was 20 30-minute sessions administered over 8 weeks. Through photos, videos, and explanations, sensory problems were described in both groups, the mother presented and implemented activities and environmental adaptations, and the therapist supervised the implementation. This study used three tools—sensory profile 2, social responsive scale 2 and Canadian occupational performance measure. Results: According to the sensory profile 2, social responsiveness scale, and Canadian occupational performance measure, processing in the areas of auditory, visual, touch, movement, body position, oral, conduct, social-emotional, attentional, sensory seeking, sensory avoiding, sensory sensitive, low registration, social awareness, social cognition, social communication, social motivation, limited interests, repetitive behaviors, and occupational performance in both groups have a significant difference (P<0.05). Conclusion: It seems that providing a sensory diet program through teleoccupational therapy on sensory processing patterns, social competency, and occupational performance is applicable, as well as face-to-face occupational therapy in children 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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".