MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7062688850

Towards Improving the Mental Health of Autistic Women: Gender/Sex Differences in Co-Occurring Conditions and Contributors to Restricted Eating Disorders of Autistic Women

2024· other· en· W7062688850 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUCL Discovery (University College London) · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermal Analysis in Power Transmission
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaAutismMental healthConfirmatory factor analysisAutistic spectrum disorderAutistic traitsToronto Alexithymia Scale
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis explores the nature and underlying contributors to mental health problems in autistic women. Part 1 presents a systematic review and meta-analysis examining gender/sex differences in co-occurring neurodevelopmental and mental health conditions in autistic adults. It identified 33 studies reporting prevalence rates for various co-occurring conditions in autistic women and men. The female-to-male odds ratios and heterogeneity across studies were calculated for ‘any co-occurring psychiatric condition’ and 14 individual conditions. The meta-analyses revealed significant gender/sex differences in the prevalence rates of co-occurring conditions among autistic adults. These findings underscore the need for heightened clinical attention to co-occurring conditions in autistic individuals, particularly women, and have the potential to inform screening efforts and tailored treatments. Part 2 presents an empirical study focused on the role of interoceptive difficulty and alexithymia in restrictive eating disorders (REDs) among autistic women. A Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to identify the best-fitting factor model to represent the constructs of interoceptive difficulty and alexithymia, as measured by the Interoceptive Sensory Questionnaire (ISQ; Fiene et al., 2018) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS; Bagby et al., 1994) across the sample. Identified factors were compared among (1) autistic women without REDs, (2) autistic women with REDs, (3) non-autistic women with REDs, and (4) women with REDs and high autistic traits. Interoceptive difficulty and certain facets of alexithymia were identified as potential risk factors for REDs in autistic women, which could inform the formulation and more tailored treatment for REDs in this population. Part 3 presents a critical appraisal of the research process and reflections on broader issues relevant to this thesis. I reflected on the research skills I developed and the insights I gained related to working with existing datasets, conceptualising abstract constructs, and conducting participatory research.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.181
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUCL Discovery (University College London)Same topicThermal Analysis in Power TransmissionFrench-language works237,207