Improving Meal Acceptance of Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder (AUT-MENU Project): Protocol for a Bicentric Intervention Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often exhibit low dietary diversity due to food selectivity, leading to various forms of malnutrition, such as obesity or micronutrient deficiencies. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the AUT-MENU project is to improve meal acceptance among individuals with ASD. A secondary goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of a nutrition education course for parents of enrolled participants to reduce food selectivity. METHODS: The study is a bicentric intervention conducted in 3 care centers (Pavia and Milan) and 1 secondary school (Rome), involving approximately 200 participants with ASD aged 3 to 35 years. The study consists of an observational phase (T0) and an intervention phase (T1). At T0, biographical data, clinical characteristics, and dietary patterns of participants are collected. Based on T0 findings and existing nutritional recommendations for individuals with ASD, targeted menus are developed and tested. At T1, the same assessment tools used at T0 will be applied to evaluate intervention effects. Additionally, a nutrition education course for caregivers will be implemented between T0 and T1, with a pre- and postcourse knowledge questionnaire to assess its effectiveness. RESULTS: Due to different timelines depending on the centers and schools involved, participant enrollment and data collection will take place at different times between Pavia, Milan, and Rome. In September 2024, enrollment was held in the Pavia and Milan care centers for a total of 74 participants enrolled. In Rome, the enrollment phase has not yet started; activities are expected to be carried out similar to those in Pavia and Milan. CONCLUSIONS: The AUT-MENU study is expected to yield significant insights and improvements in meal acceptance among individuals with ASD, particularly through the introduction of targeted menus in collective catering settings both in care centers and schools. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06266377; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06266377. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/57507.
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 | 0.025 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.011 |
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".