MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7119442250

Metas funcionais de crianças e adolescentes brasileiros com transtorno do espectro autista e paralisia cerebral: perspectivas da família

2024· dissertation· pt· W7119442250 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda Aparecida Alves Cunha Nascimento

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languagept
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderSocioeconomic statusAutismCerebral palsyAssociation (psychology)Affect (linguistics)Intervention (counseling)Exploratory research
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Cerebral Palsy (CP) affect many children and adolescents, requiring intervention programs that meet their needs, focusing on a family-centered approach. Studies on the subject focus on developed countries, leaving a knowledge gap about the needs and expectations of families in countries with different socioeconomic and health realities, such as Brazil. This dissertation investigates, in an exploratory manner, the functional goals of parents and family members of children and adolescents with ASD and CP from all brazilian regions. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used to define goals, based on family-centered practice. Study 1 was conducted with 241 children and adolescents with ASD, average age 6.95 years (sd=3.69), 75.9% of whom were male. Their parents responded to the COPM by choosing goals to be worked on in interventions. A total of 1.203 goals were established, organized into categories by the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA). The main goals were related to activities of daily living (ADLs), behavioral difficulties, communication, play, and social interactions. This profile was similar across different levels of support and age groups, but with some variations. Play-related goals were more frequent for participants at support level 3 than those at level 1 (p<0.005). Education goals appeared more frequently at support level 1 (p<0.005). Communication demands were more significant among children aged 0-6 years (p<0.05), while among adolescents, meal preparation and cleaning goals were more significant (p<0.05). In Study 2, 171 children and adolescents with CP and their families were selected, average age 7.68 years (sd=3.32), of whom 54.4% were male. A total of 740 functional goals were identified, also organized into categories by the AOTA. The main goals included ADLs, body functions, motor skills, and play. The profiles of functional goals were similar across different levels of GMFCS, MACS, and age groups, but with some variations. Play goals were more frequent for children aged 0-6 years (p<0.05). Dressing goals were more significant among participants at GMFCS levels I-III, while positioning motor skills were more frequent for levels IV-V (p<0.05). Participants at MACS levels I-III showed significant differences (p<0.05) in toilet use and personal hygiene goals, while at levels IV-V, the most significant goals were swallowing and communication (p<0.05). In summary, ADLs emerge as the main focus area for both children and adolescents with ASD and those with CP. Prioritizing ADLs reflects a desire of parents to promote their children's autonomy, which can significantly reduce parental burden and stress, as well as expand community participation. Interventions and therapeutic programs aimed at children with disabilities should emphasize the development of skills related to ADLs, thus meeting the immediate needs of these individuals and preparing them for a future with more independence and greater participation.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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 venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)→Same topicFamily and Disability Support Research→French-language works237,207→