MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614849798 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.04.009

Measurement properties of screening and diagnostic tools for autism spectrum adults of mean normal intelligence: A systematic review

2017· review· en· W2614849798 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChecklistAutismAutism spectrum disorderPsychologySystematic reviewDiagnostic accuracyReliability (semiconductor)Clinical psychologyMEDLINEMedicineApplied psychologyPsychiatryCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The autism spectrum (AS) is a multifaceted neurodevelopmental variant associated with lifelong challenges. Despite the relevant importance of identifying AS in adults for epidemiological, public health, and quality of life issues, the measurement properties of the tools currently used to screen and diagnose adults without intellectual disabilities (ID) have not been assessed. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review addresses the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the reported AS screening and diagnostic tools used in adults without ID. METHODS: Electronic databases and bibliographies were searched, and identified papers evaluated against inclusion criteria. The PRISMA statement was used for reporting the review. We evaluated the quality of the papers using the COSMIN Checklist for psychometric data, and QUADAS-2 for diagnostic data. For the COSMIN assessment, evidence was considered to be strong when several methodologically good articles, or one excellent article, reported consistent evidence for or against a measurement property. For the QUADAS ratings, evidence was considered to be "satisfactory" if at least one study was rated with a low risk of bias and low concern about applicability. RESULTS: We included 38 articles comprising 32 studies, five reviews, and one book chapter and assessed nine tools (three diagnostic and six screening, including eight of their short versions). Among screening tools, only AQ-50, AQ-S, and RAADS-R and RAADS-14 were found to provide satisfactory or intermediate values for their psychometric properties, supported by strong or moderate evidence. Nevertheless, risks of bias and concerns on the applicability of these tools limit the evidence on their diagnostic properties. We found that none of the gold standard diagnostic tools used for children had satisfactory measurement properties. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence for the measurement properties of the screening and diagnostic tools used for AS adults with a mean normal range of measured intelligence. This may lessen the validity of conclusions and public health decisions on an important fraction of the adult autistic population. This not only justifies further validation studies of screening and diagnostic tools for autistic adults, but also supports the parallel use of self-reported information and clinical expertise with these instruments during the diagnostic process.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.229
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.127 · 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