MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415234716 · doi:10.1186/s13229-025-00683-z

The Developmental Assessment of Social Communication Ability (DASCA): initial creation and psychometric description

2025· article· en· W4415234716 on OpenAlexaff
Aaron J. Kaat, Audrey Thurm, Cristan Farmer, Shuting Zheng, Sheila Ghods, Stelios Georgiades, Stephen M. Kanne, Shrikanth Narayanan, Somer Bishop

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Autism · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsComputerized adaptive testingSocial communicationTest (biology)Measure (data warehouse)Outcome (game theory)PsychometricsQuality of Life Research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The dearth of tools to quantify and track growth in social communication ability has been a barrier to understanding and monitoring treatment outcomes for neurodevelopmental disorders. We undertook a multi-staged, multisite study to create the Developmental Assessment of Social Communication Ability (DASCA), a new measure explicitly developed as a clinical outcome assessment for monitoring change-both over the course of development and in response to treatment. METHODS: The DASCA is a caregiver-report instrument created using a mixed-methods approach. Qualitative components of this approach included focus groups and cognitive debriefing interviews. Quantitative components included dimensionality analysis, differential item functioning, and item response theory modeling. The item bank was iteratively refined to assess social communication skills that are typically acquired by early- to middle- childhood. RESULTS: The final DASCA item bank contains 184 items. Expressive language was a major factor in determining the appropriateness of some items for certain groups of children. Negligible differential item functioning, primarily by age, was observed for some items. However, impact analyses determined that this differential item functioning did not meaningfully impact overall scores. LIMITATIONS: Given that sample size limitations prevented us from using separate samples for exploratory and confirmatory phases of modeling, it will be important to gather additional validity evidence in independent samples, especially as the current data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSION: The DASCA holds promise as an outcome measure for assessing changes in social communication ability. Ongoing development efforts include creating a computer adaptive test administration to allow for serial assessments using different item sets to yield a consistent score that is sensitive to change.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.336 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular AutismSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207