Early Detection of 5 Neurodevelopmental Disorders of Children and Prevention of Postnatal Depression With a Mobile Health App: Observational Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delay in the diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) in toddlers and postnatal depression (PND) is a major public health issue. In both cases, early intervention is crucial but too rarely implemented in practice. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to determine if a dedicated mobile app can improve screening of 5 NDDs (autism spectrum disorder [ASD], language delay, dyspraxia, dyslexia, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]) and reduce PND incidence. METHODS: We performed an observational, cross-sectional, data-based study in a population of young parents in France with at least 1 child aged <10 years at the time of inclusion and regularly using Malo, an "all-in-one" multidomain digital health record electronic patient-reported outcome (PRO) app for smartphones. We included the first 50,000 users matching the criteria and agreeing to participate between May 1, 2022, and February 8, 2024. Parents received periodic questionnaires assessing skills in neurodevelopment domains via the app. Mothers accessed a support program to prevent PND and were requested to answer regular PND questionnaires. When any PROs matched predefined criteria, an in-app recommendation was sent to book an appointment with a family physician or pediatrician. The main outcomes were the median age of the infant at the time of notification for possible NDD and the incidence of PND detection after childbirth. One secondary outcome was the relevance of the NDD notification by consultation as assessed by health professionals. RESULTS: Among 55,618 children median age 4 months (IQR 9), 439 (0.8%) had at least 1 disorder for which consultation was critically necessary. The median ages of notification for probable ASD, language delay, dyspraxia, dyslexia, and ADHD were 32.5 (IQR 12.8), 16 (IQR 13), 36 (IQR 22.5), 80 (IQR 5), and 61 (IQR 15.5) months, respectively. The rate of probable ADHD, ASD, dyslexia, language delay, and dyspraxia in the population of children of the age included between the detection limits of each alert was 1.48%, 0.21%, 1.52%, 0.91%, and 0.37%, respectively. Sensitivity of alert notifications for suspected NDDs as assessed by the physicians was 78.6% and specificity was 98.2%. Among 8243 mothers who completed a PND questionnaire, highly probable PND was detected in 938 (11.4%), corresponding to a reduction of -31% versus our previous study without a support program. Suspected PND was detected a median 96 days (IQR 86) after childbirth. Among 130 users who filled in the satisfaction survey, 99.2% (129/130) found the app easy to use and 70% (91/130) reported that the app improved follow-up of their child. The app was rated 4.8/5 on Apple's App Store. CONCLUSIONS: Algorithm-based early alerts suggesting NDDs were highly specific with good sensitivity as assessed by real-life practitioners. Early detection of 5 NDDs and PNDs was efficient and led to a possible 31% reduction in PND incidence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06301087; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06301087.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".