Assessment of the Global Integration Method on the parents’ perception of functional goals in children and adolescents with autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) may experience impairments across all domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. However, there is a scarcity of programs that integrate interventions encompassing all these domains. Objective: To investigate parents' perception of performance and satisfaction with functional goals for children with ASD after intervention with the Global Integration. Methods: This single-group quasi-experimental study involved a total of 98 participants aged 1.8 to 18.2 years who underwent a 3-month intervention, five times a week, for 3-4 h per day. The intervention involved functional task training in an environment inspired by the natural environment associated with the use of a flexible therapeutic suit. The primary outcome measure was the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, administered before and after the intervention. Results: Ninety-five participants completed the study. Approximately 60% of participants showed improvements in performance and satisfaction that ranged from 1 to 9 points on the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. The Global Integration Method program resulted in significant improvements in goal performance (p<0.001, d=0.80) and satisfaction (p<0.001, d=0.67). Most parents (81%) believed that the Global Integration Method incorporated aspects of family-professional collaboration and were satisfied (93%) with the intervention. Conclusion: In the perception of parents, the Global Integration Method demonstrated effectiveness in achieving functional goals for children with ASD and their families. Parents expressed satisfaction with the intervention and indicated that it incorporated elements of family-professional collaboration.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".