MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215305288 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.1688

Use of the autism spectrum screening questionnaire for identification of autism spectrum disorders in 8-10 years old georgian children*

2021· article· en· W3215305288 on OpenAlexaff
Medea Zirakashvili, Tamar Mikiashvili, G. Chvamania, Nana Mebonia, Maia Gabunia

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsEducation and Early Childhood Development
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorgianAutismPercentileMedicineAutism spectrum disorderStrengths and Difficulties QuestionnairePsychologyDemographyPediatricsClinical psychologyPsychiatryMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Rising prevalence of autism spectrum disorders highlights importance of research priority of development of effective screening procedures for schoolage children. Objectives The study aimed to identify the prevalence of ASD among 8-10 y old schoolchildren in Republic of Georgia. Methods In 2019 a cross sectional survey in four main cities of Republic of Georgia was conducted, totally 3rd and 4th grade (8-10 y old) 16654 children from 211 public schools were included. The Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ), completed by parents and teachers, was used to determine children at risk for ASD. Results 16654 (response rate 74%) parents were agreed to participate in the study. Parents and teachers rated 770 (5.0%) and 669 children (4.9%), respectively, as screen positive (in top five percentile). Cut-off scores for 99-95 percentiles (top 1-5%) was defined. Boys were more likely to be rated screenpositive than girls. Share of boys rated in the top 5% by parents is 5.6% compared to 4.3% of girls. Teachers place boys in the top 5% even more frequently – 6.4% versus 3.4% girls. Pairwise correlation coefficients (0.53) revealed moderate correlations between scores and according to p-values (< 0.05) all correlations were statistically significant. Conclusions The study defined the cut-off scores of ASSQ for 8-10 y old Georgian children and gender difference in prevalence of risk for ASD. Using the ASSQ was an effective instrument and could be used in school settings to identify children with special needs. *This work was supported by Shota Rustaveli National Science Foundation of Georgia (SRNSFG), grant - FR-18-304. Disclosure No significant relationships.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207