Assessing the validity of administrative health data for the identification of children and youth with autism spectrum disorder in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Population-level identification of children and youth with ASD is essential for surveillance and planning for required services. The objective of this study was to develop and validate an algorithm for the identification of children and youth with ASD using administrative health data. In this retrospective validation study, we linked an electronic medical record (EMR)-based reference standard, consisting 10,000 individuals aged 1-24 years, including 112 confirmed ASD cases to Ontario administrative health data, for the testing of multiple case-finding algorithms. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for each algorithm. The optimal algorithm was validated in three external cohorts representing family practice, education, and specialized clinical settings. The optimal algorithm included an ASD diagnostic code for a single hospital discharge or emergency department visit or outpatient surgery, or three ASD physician billing codes in 3 years. This algorithm's sensitivity was 50.0% (95%CI 40.7-88.7%), specificity 99.6% (99.4-99.7), PPV 56.6% (46.8-66.3), and NPV 99.4% (99.3-99.6). The results of this study illustrate limitations and need for cautious interpretation when using administrative health data alone for the identification of children and youth with ASD. LAY SUMMARY: We tested algorithms (set of rules) to identify young people with ASD using routinely collected administrative health data. Even the best algorithm misses more than half of those in Ontario with ASD. To understand this better, we tested how well the algorithm worked in different settings (family practice, education, and specialized clinics). The identification of individuals with ASD at a population level is essential for planning for support services and the allocation of resources. Autism Res 2021, 14: 1037-1045. © 2021 The Authors. Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".