Research trends of music in children with autism: a bibliometric analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The impact of music on children with autism-a condition marked by deficits in social interaction, communication, and behavior-has become a significant area of research. This study investigates current trends, key contributors, and emerging interests regarding music's effects on this population. Methods: A comprehensive review of publications from 1953 to 2024 on the influence of music on children with autism was conducted using the Web of Science Core Collection. Bibliometric and visual analyses were performed with VOSviewer, CiteSpace, and R version 4.3.3. Results: A total of 411 research papers were identified, with significant publication growth noted post-2009. The leading countries in this research include the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, China, and Australia. McGill University ranked as the most prolific institution (23 publications), followed by the University of Montreal (17) and Vanderbilt University (12). The Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders is the most influential journal, with an h-index of 19 and 1,706 citations. Professor Christian Gold emerged as the top author, with 12 papers totaling 599 citations. Key keywords included "children," "autism," and "therapy," with a noted increase in terms like "social skills," "communication," and "engagement" since 2020. Conclusion: This study highlights music's potential to enhance social and communication skills in children with autism. Future research should explore the long-term effects of music therapy on language, cognition, and behavioral outcomes, as well as its role in improving engagement in educational and therapeutic settings.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | Bibliometrics Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
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 | 0.014 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.196 | 0.235 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".