{"title":"自闭症谱系评定量表的标准有效性 教师报告","authors":"Amy Camodeca","doi":"10.1177/07342829241234697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is a need to investigate the diagnostic utility of autism diagnostic questionnaires in school-age children, who are increasingly being referred for autism assessment. Aside from the standardization sample, little research has been conducted on the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales, particularly regarding teacher reports. This study investigated the criterion validity of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales-Teacher report for ages 6–18 (ASRS-T<jats:sub>6-18</jats:sub>) in a well-characterized community sample of 409 children (autism [AUT] n = 122; non-autism [NOT] n = 287; [Formula: see text] age = 9.91) evaluated with the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2, a well-validated autism diagnostic measure. Significant mean differences with small to moderate effect sizes ( d = 0.28–0.56) were observed for all scores except Self-Regulation, Adult interaction, and Attention. Logistic Regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses conducted for the Summary, ASRS, and two Treatment scales (Peer and Social-Emotional Reciprocity) indicated low ORs (<|1.08|) and AUCs in the poor range (<.67). Total and Unusual Behavior emerged as comparatively stronger scales with covariates (age and IQ); other scales were generally similar with/without control variables. Sensitivity and specificity could not be optimized. The suggested 60 t-cutpoint had fair or good sensitivity (76.23–83.61) for all examined scales except Unusual Behavior (68.03). However, specificity was poor (46.93–54.36), with high false positive rates (45.64%–63.07%). In complex community samples, the ASRS-T<jats:sub>6-18</jats:sub> behaves more like a screener as opposed to a diagnostic measure.","PeriodicalId":51446,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Criterion Validity of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales Teacher Report\",\"authors\":\"Amy Camodeca\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/07342829241234697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is a need to investigate the diagnostic utility of autism diagnostic questionnaires in school-age children, who are increasingly being referred for autism assessment. Aside from the standardization sample, little research has been conducted on the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales, particularly regarding teacher reports. This study investigated the criterion validity of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales-Teacher report for ages 6–18 (ASRS-T<jats:sub>6-18</jats:sub>) in a well-characterized community sample of 409 children (autism [AUT] n = 122; non-autism [NOT] n = 287; [Formula: see text] age = 9.91) evaluated with the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2, a well-validated autism diagnostic measure. Significant mean differences with small to moderate effect sizes ( d = 0.28–0.56) were observed for all scores except Self-Regulation, Adult interaction, and Attention. Logistic Regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses conducted for the Summary, ASRS, and two Treatment scales (Peer and Social-Emotional Reciprocity) indicated low ORs (<|1.08|) and AUCs in the poor range (<.67). Total and Unusual Behavior emerged as comparatively stronger scales with covariates (age and IQ); other scales were generally similar with/without control variables. Sensitivity and specificity could not be optimized. The suggested 60 t-cutpoint had fair or good sensitivity (76.23–83.61) for all examined scales except Unusual Behavior (68.03). However, specificity was poor (46.93–54.36), with high false positive rates (45.64%–63.07%). In complex community samples, the ASRS-T<jats:sub>6-18</jats:sub> behaves more like a screener as opposed to a diagnostic measure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241234697\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07342829241234697","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Criterion Validity of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales Teacher Report
There is a need to investigate the diagnostic utility of autism diagnostic questionnaires in school-age children, who are increasingly being referred for autism assessment. Aside from the standardization sample, little research has been conducted on the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales, particularly regarding teacher reports. This study investigated the criterion validity of the Autism Spectrum Rating Scales-Teacher report for ages 6–18 (ASRS-T6-18) in a well-characterized community sample of 409 children (autism [AUT] n = 122; non-autism [NOT] n = 287; [Formula: see text] age = 9.91) evaluated with the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2, a well-validated autism diagnostic measure. Significant mean differences with small to moderate effect sizes ( d = 0.28–0.56) were observed for all scores except Self-Regulation, Adult interaction, and Attention. Logistic Regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic analyses conducted for the Summary, ASRS, and two Treatment scales (Peer and Social-Emotional Reciprocity) indicated low ORs (<|1.08|) and AUCs in the poor range (<.67). Total and Unusual Behavior emerged as comparatively stronger scales with covariates (age and IQ); other scales were generally similar with/without control variables. Sensitivity and specificity could not be optimized. The suggested 60 t-cutpoint had fair or good sensitivity (76.23–83.61) for all examined scales except Unusual Behavior (68.03). However, specificity was poor (46.93–54.36), with high false positive rates (45.64%–63.07%). In complex community samples, the ASRS-T6-18 behaves more like a screener as opposed to a diagnostic measure.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment (JPA) publishes contemporary and important information focusing on psychological and educational assessment research and evidence-based practices as well as assessment instrumentation. JPA is well known internationally for the quality of published assessment-related research, theory and practice papers, and book and test reviews. The methodologically sound and impiricially-based studies and critical test and book reviews will be of particular interest to all assessment specialists including practicing psychologists, psychoeducational consultants, educational diagnosticians and special educators.