MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411506416 · doi:10.1177/13623613251345532

Population-level gender-based analysis of the educational journeys of students with autism spectrum disorder in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4411506416 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jennifer Baumbusch, Jennifer E. V. Lloyd, Vanessa C. Fong

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderAutismPsychologyPopulationSpecial educationDevelopmental psychologyEducational attainmentCredentialClinical psychologyDemographyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research examining the impact of gender on educational outcomes in autistic students has been sparse. To address this gap, this study investigated the educational journeys of students with autism spectrum disorder in British Columbia, Canada. We examined (1) the time it takes for students to receive an initial autism spectrum disorder designation; and the frequency and percentage of students who (2) stay longitudinally in the Kindergarten-to-Grade 12 school system; (3) complete high school and the credential earned; and (4) proceed to public post-secondary education within British Columbia. We conducted secondary analyses of administrative data. The autism spectrum disorder student population was divided into eight longitudinal cohorts with a combined final sample size of 4282 students with autism spectrum disorder: 738 female (17.2%) and 3544 (82.8%) male. Descriptive analyses indicated statistically significant gender differences in students’ time to initial autism spectrum disorder designation, rates of high school completion and the specific high school credential earned. No gender differences were found in post-secondary transition rates. During their formative education years, gender differences, particularly the delay in autism spectrum disorder diagnosis among girls, may have implications with respect to educational outcomes. Results emphasize the need to provide educators with greater information about recognizing gender differences in autism spectrum disorder. Lay Abstract a. What is already known about the topic? Over the past several years, there is growing acknowledgement of gender inequities among people with autism spectrum disorder. The inequity is evidenced, in part, by gender differences in diagnosis. Although the gender gap is narrowing, until recently the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorder has largely favoured and is more sensitive to detecting autism spectrum disorder in boys. b. What does this paper add? Research examining the impact of gender on educational outcomes in autistic students has been sparse. To address this gap in the literature, the current study investigated the educational journeys of students with autism spectrum disorder in British Columbia, Canada. We found statistically significant gender differences in students’ time to initial autism spectrum disorder designation, rates of high school completion and the specific high school credential earned. There were, however, no significant differences in whether or not students stayed longitudinally in the K-12 school system over time, whether students transitioned into post-secondary or not (non-developmental or developmental), nor in students’ transition times into the respective post-secondary education programmes. This study highlights the value of longitudinal, population-based and student-level data in conducting gender-based analyses in autism spectrum disorder research. c. Implications for practice, research or policy Understanding how gender impacts the academic trajectories of students with autism spectrum disorder over time can inform the development of tailored interventions and services which address their unique needs. Ultimately, this research is needed to promote more equitable educational experiences and outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutismSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207