MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907846970 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.6613820

Participation of Children With Autism During COVID-19: The Role of Maternal Participation

2023· other· en· W6907846970 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation Methods and Technologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismFragile Families and Child Wellbeing StudyActivities of daily livingCommunity participationSocial engagementPandemicAffect (linguistics)Youth participation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:Little is known about participation during adverse times.Objectives:This study described participation of children with autism aged 6 to 13 during COVID-19 pandemic and examined the extent to which child factors, mother’s own participation, and environmental barriers/supports explain child participation in home and community.Method:A total of 130 mothers completed the Participation and Environment Measure for Children and Youth, the Health Promoting Activities Scale, functional issues checklist, and sociodemographic questionnaire.Results:Children’s participation frequency and involvement were significantly higher at home than in the community. In both settings, mothers desired change in 71% of activities. Multiple regression models indicated that child’s age and mother’s participation frequency significantly explained child’s home involvement (R2 = 21%), where mother’s participation (frequency) had a unique contribution (ΔR2 = 10.4%) at home but not in the community.Conclusion:Findings imply the importance of maternal participation to child’s participation at home and suggest redirecting attention for enhancing family participation as a whole.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataSame topicEducation Methods and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207