Parent Outcomes Following Participation in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Autistic Children in a Community Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parents of autistic children are at higher risk for mental health problems, including anxiety, depression and stress. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) that targets children’s emotion regulation problems may have an indirect influence on parent outcomes, especially if they play a supporting role in the intervention. However, the majority of the implemented CBT interventions were carried out in highly controlled research settings and no study has examined the parent outcomes of child-focused CBT in a community setting. The current study examined parent outcomes (i.e., mental health, mindful parenting and parenting practices) following a community-based CBT program with concurrent parent involvement for autistic children, as well as associations between parent and child outcomes (i.e., autism symptoms and emotion dysregulation) using change scores. Participants included 77 parent-child dyads across 7 community organizations in Ontario, Canada. Parents reported improved mindful parenting and positive parenting practices post intervention, and no significant change for their mental health. Multiple mediation analyses revealed that parent positive changes were associated with child positive changes in emotion regulation, with changes in parenting practices mediating the relationship between mindful parenting and child emotion regulation. This research suggests mutual beneficial outcome for all the stakeholders including children, parents, community organizations and public policy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".