MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992174994 · doi:10.1002/aur.2252

Identification of Pediatric Autism Spectrum Disorder Cases Using Health Administrative Data

2019· article· en· W2992174994 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Celeste Bickford, Tim F. Oberlander, Nancy Lanphear, Whitney Weikum, Patricia A. Janssen, Hélène Ouellette‐Kuntz, Gillian E. Hanley

Bibliographic record

VenueAutism Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalSunny Hill Health Centre for ChildrenQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAutism spectrum disorderAutismIdentification (biology)PsychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Administrative data are frequently used to identify Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) cases in epidemiological studies. However, validation studies on this mode of case ascertainment have lacked access to high-quality clinical diagnostic data and have not followed published reporting guidelines. We report on the diagnostic accuracy of using readily available health administrative data for pediatric ASD case ascertainment. The validation cohort included almost all the ASD-positive children born in British Columbia, Canada from April 1, 2000 to December 31, 2009 and consisted of 8,670 children in total. 4,079 ASD-positive and 2,787 ASD-negative children were identified using Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) assessments done through the British Columbia Autism Assessment Network (BCAAN). An additional 1,804 ADOS/ADI-R assessed ASD-positive children were identified using Ministry of Education records. This prospectively collected clinical data (the diagnostic gold standard) was then linked to each child's physician billing and hospital discharge data. The diagnostic accuracy of 11 algorithms that used the administrative data to assign ASD case status was assessed. For all algorithms, high positive predictive values (PPVs) were observed alongside low values for other measures of diagnostic accuracy illustrating that PPVs alone are not an adequate measure of diagnostic accuracy. We show that British Columbia's health administrative data cannot reliably be used to discriminate between children with ASD and children with other developmental disorders. Utilizing these data may result in misclassification bias. Methodologically sound, region-specific validation studies are needed to support the use of administrative data for ASD case ascertainment. Autism Res 2020, 13: 456-463. © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: Health administrative data are frequently used to identify Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) cases for research purposes. However, previous validation studies on this sort of case identification have lacked access to high-quality clinical diagnostic data and have not followed published reporting guidelines. We show that British Columbia's health administrative data cannot reliably be used to discriminate between children with ASD and children with other developmental disorders.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAutism ResearchSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207