MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987345152 · doi:10.1136/ebmh.8.3.69

The Screening Tool for Autism in Two Year Olds can identify children at risk of autism

2005· letter· en· W1987345152 on OpenAlexaff
Lonnie Zwaigenbaum

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Mental Health · 2005
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutismPediatricsIMGMedicineAudiologyPsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stone WL, Coonrod EE, Turner LM, et al . Psychometric properties of the STAT for early autism screening. J Autism Dev Disord 2004;34:691–701.[OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] Q How accurate is the Screening Tool for Autism in Two Year Olds (STAT) for identifying children at risk of autism? ### ![Graphic][5] Design: Diagnostic cohort study. ### ![Graphic][6] Setting: University based diagnostic evaluation centre and affiliated speech and hearing centre, Tennessee, USA; 1997 to 2001. ### ![Graphic][7] Patients: Initial validation of the STAT was carried out in 13 matched pairs of children aged 24–35 months, with a diagnosis of autism or alternatively developmental delay, language impairment, or both (DD/LI), and without severe sensory or motor impairment. Further validation was carried out in a sample of 104 children selected on the basis of parental report of developmental concerns. ### ![Graphic][8] Test: The STAT consists of 12 interactive items assessing different behavioural domains, including play, requesting, directing attention, and motor imitation. The test was administered by trained examiners who were blinded to the children’s diagnoses. Overall score ranges from 0 to 4, with lower … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJournal%2Bof%2Bautism%2Band%2Bdevelopmental%2Bdisorders%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BAutism%2BDev%2BDisord%26rft.aulast%253DStone%26rft.auinit1%253DW.%2BL.%26rft.volume%253D34%26rft.issue%253D6%26rft.spage%253D691%26rft.epage%253D701%26rft.atitle%253DPsychometric%2Bproperties%2Bof%2Bthe%2BSTAT%2Bfor%2Bearly%2Bautism%2Bscreening.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1007%252Fs10803-004-5289-8%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15679188%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1007/s10803-004-5289-8&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=15679188&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F8%2F3%2F69.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000225619900010&link_type=ISI [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif

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)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.315 · 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
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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based Mental HealthSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207