The Utility of the R-ABC in Assessing Risk for Autism Compared With the M-CHAT: An Exploratory Study

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Sidni A. Justus, Jenny L. Singleton, Agata Rozga
{"title":"The Utility of the R-ABC in Assessing Risk for Autism Compared With the M-CHAT: An Exploratory Study","authors":"Sidni A. Justus, Jenny L. Singleton, Agata Rozga","doi":"10.1177/10883576241232904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past 20+ years, researchers have worked toward identifying early behavioral predictors of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and developing observation-based screeners to supplement existing parent-report methods. This study is a follow-up, 3 to 8 years later, with parents/caregivers of 57 children previously enrolled in a university-based study evaluating early ASD-risk. The original study evaluated infants’ (ages 15–35 months) ASD-risk through both observation-based and parent-report screeners. At follow-up, caregivers completed a phone interview inquiring about their child’s developmental progress and diagnostic outcomes. Results indicated screener at-risk status agreement in infancy predicted only one of the four parent-reported ASD diagnoses at follow-up. Single instrument at-risk status aligned with two additional ASD diagnoses (one per screener), and both screeners missed one ASD diagnosis at follow-up. Results did not indicate significant added utility for the observation-based screener over the commonly used parent-report screener, suggesting that ASD behavioral markers may be hard to observe at early ages.","PeriodicalId":12133,"journal":{"name":"Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576241232904","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Over the past 20+ years, researchers have worked toward identifying early behavioral predictors of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and developing observation-based screeners to supplement existing parent-report methods. This study is a follow-up, 3 to 8 years later, with parents/caregivers of 57 children previously enrolled in a university-based study evaluating early ASD-risk. The original study evaluated infants’ (ages 15–35 months) ASD-risk through both observation-based and parent-report screeners. At follow-up, caregivers completed a phone interview inquiring about their child’s developmental progress and diagnostic outcomes. Results indicated screener at-risk status agreement in infancy predicted only one of the four parent-reported ASD diagnoses at follow-up. Single instrument at-risk status aligned with two additional ASD diagnoses (one per screener), and both screeners missed one ASD diagnosis at follow-up. Results did not indicate significant added utility for the observation-based screener over the commonly used parent-report screener, suggesting that ASD behavioral markers may be hard to observe at early ages.
与 M-CHAT 相比,R-ABC 在评估自闭症风险方面的实用性:一项探索性研究
在过去的 20 多年里,研究人员一直致力于确定自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)的早期行为预测因素,并开发基于观察的筛查工具来补充现有的家长报告方法。本研究是在 3 到 8 年后,对之前参加过一项大学研究的 57 名儿童的家长/监护人进行的一项评估早期 ASD 风险的后续研究。最初的研究通过基于观察和家长报告的筛查方法对婴儿(15-35 个月)的 ASD 风险进行了评估。在随访时,照顾者完成了一次电话访谈,询问孩子的发育进展和诊断结果。结果表明,婴儿期筛查器的风险状态一致性仅能预测随访时家长报告的四项 ASD 诊断中的一项。单一工具的风险状态与另外两个 ASD 诊断一致(每个筛查者一个),两个筛查者在随访时都漏掉了一个 ASD 诊断。结果表明,与常用的家长报告筛查器相比,基于观察的筛查器的效用并没有明显增加,这表明 ASD 行为标记在早期可能很难观察到。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities addresses issues concerning individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities and their families. Manuscripts reflect a wide range of disciplines, including education, psychology, psychiatry, medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech/language pathology, social work, and related areas. The journal’s editorial staff seeks manuscripts from diverse philosophical and theoretical positions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信