MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016330668 · doi:10.1111/jcpp.13242

Sex differences in scores on standardized measures of autism symptoms: a multisite integrative data analysis

2020· article· en· W3016330668 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron J. Kaat, Amy M. Shui, Sheila Ghods, Cristan Farmer, Amy Esler, Audrey Thurm, Stelios Georgiades, Stephen M. Kanne, Catherine Lord, Young S. Kim, Somer Bishop

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute of Mental HealthAutism Science Foundation
KeywordsAutism Diagnostic Observation ScheduleAutismRaw scorePsychologyAutism spectrum disorderClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyRaw dataStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised that scores on standard measures of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms may differ as a function of sex. However, these findings are hindered by small female samples studied thus far. The current study evaluated if, after accounting for age, IQ, and language level, sex affects ASD severity estimates from diagnostic measures among children with ASD. METHODS: Data were obtained from eight sources comprising 27 sites. Linear mixed-effects models, including a random effect for site, were fit for 10 outcomes (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule [ADOS] domain-level calibrated severity scores, Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised [ADI-R] raw scores by age-based algorithm, and raw scores from the two indices on the Social Responsiveness Scale [SRS]). Sex was added to the models after controlling for age, NVIQ, and an indicator for language level. RESULTS: Sex significantly improved model fit for half of the outcomes, but least square mean differences were generally negligible (effect sizes [ES] < 0.20), increasing to small to moderate in adolescence (ES < 0.40). Boys received more severe RRB scores than girls on both the ADOS and ADI-R (age 4 + algorithm), and girls received more severe scores than boys on both SRS indices, which emerged in adolescence. CONCLUSIONS: This study combined several available databases to create the largest sample of girls with ASD diagnoses. We found minimal differences due to sex beyond other known influences on ASD severity indicators. This may suggest that, among children who ultimately receive a clinical ASD diagnosis, severity estimates do not systematically differ to such an extent that sex-specific scoring procedures would be necessary. However, given the limitations inherent in clinically ascertained samples, future research must address questions about systematic sex differences among children or adults who do not receive clinical diagnoses of ASD. Moreover, while the current study helps resolve questions about widely used diagnostic instruments, we could not address sex differences in phenotypic aspects outside of these scores.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations117
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child Psychology and PsychiatrySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207