فعالية برنامج تنموي في خفض الاليكسيثميا لدى عينة من الأطفال التوحديين بالمملكة العربية السعودية
Bibliographic record
Abstract
استهدفت الدراسة معرفة فعالية برنامج تنموي في خفض الاليكسيثميا لدى عينة من الأطفال التوحديين، وتكونت عينة الدراسة من (16) طفل وطفلة من الأطفال التوحديين تم تقسيمهم إلى مجموعتين، مجموعة تجريبية (ن=8) ومجموعة ضابطة (ن=8) ، واستخدمت الدراسة الأدوات التالية لتحقيق أهدفها ، مقياس الاليكسيثميا (اعداد/ الباحث) ، البرنامج التنموي، وقد أسفرت الدراسة عن وجود فروق دالة إحصائياً بين متوسطي رتب درجات المجموعتين التجريبية والضابطة في القياس البعدي على مقياس الاليكسيثميا في اتجاه المجموعة الضابطة، ووجود فروق دالة إحصائياً بين متوسطي رتب درجات المجموعة التجريبية في الاليكسيثميا قبل وبعد تطبيق البرنامج في اتجاه القياس القبلي، وعدم وجود فروق دالة إحصائياً بين متوسطي رتب درجات المجموعة التجريبية على مقياس الاليكسيثميا في القياسين البعدي والتتبعي.The study aimed to determine the effectiveness of a developmental program in reducing alexithymia in a sample of autistic children. The study sample consisted of (16) boys and girls who were divided into two groups: an experimental group (n = 8) and a control group (n = 8). The study used the following tools to achieve its objectives: the alexithymia scale (prepared by the researcher), and the developmental program. The study revealed statistically significant differences between the average ranks of the scores of the experimental and control groups in the post-test on the alexithymia scale, favoring the control group. There were also statistically significant differences between the average ranks of the experimental group's scores in alexithymia before and after implementing the program, favoring the pre-test. There were no statistically significant differences between the average ranks of the experimental group's scores on the alexithymia scale in the post-test and follow-up tests
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 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.117 | 0.036 |
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".