MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139013981 · doi:10.1111/jcpp.12421

Diagnostic stability in young children at risk for autism spectrum disorder: a baby siblings research consortium study

2015· article· en· W2139013981 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaDalhousie UniversityHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthMedical Research CouncilNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentAutism SpeaksChildren Neurodevelopmental Disorders Network
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderPediatricsAutismPsychologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) made before age 3 has been found to be remarkably stable in clinic- and community-ascertained samples. The stability of an ASD diagnosis in prospectively ascertained samples of infants at risk for ASD due to familial factors has not yet been studied, however. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends intensive surveillance and screening for this high-risk group, which may afford earlier identification. Therefore, it is critical to understand the stability of an ASD diagnosis made before age 3 in young children at familial risk. METHODS: Data were pooled across seven sites of the Baby Siblings Research Consortium. Evaluations of 418 later-born siblings of children with ASD were conducted at 18, 24, and 36 months of age and a clinical diagnosis of ASD or Not ASD was made at each age. RESULTS: The stability of an ASD diagnosis at 18 months was 93% and at 24 months was 82%. There were relatively few children diagnosed with ASD at 18 or 24 months whose diagnosis was not confirmed at 36 months. There were, however, many children with ASD outcomes at 36 months who had not yet been diagnosed at 18 months (63%) or 24 months (41%). CONCLUSIONS: The stability of an ASD diagnosis in this familial-risk sample was high at both 18 and 24 months of age and comparable with previous data from clinic- and community-ascertained samples. However, almost half of the children with ASD outcomes were not identified as being on the spectrum at 24 months and did not receive an ASD diagnosis until 36 months. Thus, longitudinal follow-up is critical for children with early signs of social-communication difficulties, even if they do not meet diagnostic criteria at initial assessment. A public health implication of these data is that screening for ASD may need to be repeated multiple times in the first years of life. These data also suggest that there is a period of early development in which ASD features unfold and emerge but have not yet reached levels supportive of a diagnosis.

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.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.330 · 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