Objective This study aimed to explore the clinical value of Children Neuropsychological and Behavioral Scale-Revision 2016(CNBS-R2016)for Autism Spectrum Disorder(ASD)screening in the presence of developmental surveil...Objective This study aimed to explore the clinical value of Children Neuropsychological and Behavioral Scale-Revision 2016(CNBS-R2016)for Autism Spectrum Disorder(ASD)screening in the presence of developmental surveillance.Methods All participants were evaluated by the CNBS-R2016 and Gesell Developmental Schedules(GDS).Spearman’s correlation coefficients and Kappa values were obtained.Taking GDS as a reference assessment,the performance of the CNBS-R2016 for detecting the developmental delays of children with ASD was analyzed with receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curves.The efficacy of the CNBS-R2016 to screen for ASD was explored by comparing Communication Warning Behavior with Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule,Second Edition(ADOS-2).Results In total,150 children aged 12–42 months with ASD were enrolled.The developmental quotients of the CNBS-R2016 were correlated with those of the GDS(r=0.62–0.94).The CNBS-R2016 and GDS had good diagnostic agreement for developmental delays(Kappa=0.73–0.89),except for Fine Motor.There was a significant difference between the proportions of Fine Motor,delays detected by the CNBS-R2016 and GDS(86.0%vs.77.3%).With GDS as a standard,the areas under the ROC curves of the CNBS-R2016 were above 0.95 for all the domains except Fine Motor,which was 0.70.In addition,the positive rate of ASD was 100.0%and 93.5%when the cut-off points of 7 and 12 in the Communication Warning Behavior subscale were used,respectively.Conclusion The CNBS-R2016 performed well in developmental assessment and screening for children with ASD,especially by Communication Warning Behaviors subscale.Therefore,the CNBS-R2016 is worthy of clinical application in children with ASD in China.展开更多
The study examined the measurement invariance (configural,metric,scalar,and error variances) and factor mean scores equivalencies of a modified version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHDSymptoms and Normal Behavi...The study examined the measurement invariance (configural,metric,scalar,and error variances) and factor mean scores equivalencies of a modified version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHDSymptoms and Normal Behavior Scale (SWAN-M) across ratings provided by mothers of clinic-referred children and adolescents,diagnosed with (N = 666) and without (N = 202) ADHD. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of these ratings provided support for the bi-factor model of ADHD [orthogonal general and specific factors for inattention (IA) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI) symptoms]. Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the bi-factor model supported full measurement invariance. Findings also showed that for latent mean scores,the ADHD group had higher scores than the non-ADHD group for the ADHD general and IA specific factors. The findings indicate that observed scores (based on maternal ratings of the SWAN-M) are comparable,as they have the same measurement properties. The theoretical,psychometric and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.展开更多
BACKGROUND Autism is the most common clinical developmental disorder in children.The childhood autism rating scale(CARS)and autistic autism behavior checklist(ABC)are the most commonly used assessment scales for diagn...BACKGROUND Autism is the most common clinical developmental disorder in children.The childhood autism rating scale(CARS)and autistic autism behavior checklist(ABC)are the most commonly used assessment scales for diagnosing autism.However,the diagnostic validations and the corresponding cutoffs for CARS and ABC in individuals with suspected autism spectrum disorder(ASD)remain unclear.Furthermore,for suspected ASD in China,it remains unclear whether CARS is a better diagnostic tool than ABC.Also unclear is whether the current cutoff points for ABC and CARS are suitable for the accurate diagnosis of ASD.AIM To investigate the diagnostic validity of CARS and ABC based on a large Chinese sample.METHODS A total of 591 outpatient children from the ASD Unit at Beijing Children’s Hospital between June and November 2019 were identified.First,the Clancy autism behavior scale(CABS)was used to screen out suspected autism from these children.Then,each suspected ASD was evaluated by CARS and ABC.Receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve analysis was used to compare diagnostic validations.We also calculated the area under the curve(AUC)for both CARS and ABC.RESULTS We found that the Cronbach alpha coefficients of CARS and ABC were 0.772 and 0.426,respectively.Therefore,the reliability of the CARS was higher than that of the ABC.In addition,we found that the correlation between CARS and CABS was 0.732.Next,we performed ROC curve analysis for CARS and ABC,which yielded AUC values of 0.846 and 0.768,respectively.The cutoff value,which is associated with the maximum Youden index,is usually applied as a decision threshold.We found that the cutoff values of CARS and ABC were 34 and 67,respectively.CONCLUSION This result indicated that CARS is superior to ABC in the Chinese population with suspected ASD.展开更多
基金This study was supported by Emergency Technology Research Project of Huazhong University of Science and Technology(No.2020kfyXGYJ020).
文摘Objective This study aimed to explore the clinical value of Children Neuropsychological and Behavioral Scale-Revision 2016(CNBS-R2016)for Autism Spectrum Disorder(ASD)screening in the presence of developmental surveillance.Methods All participants were evaluated by the CNBS-R2016 and Gesell Developmental Schedules(GDS).Spearman’s correlation coefficients and Kappa values were obtained.Taking GDS as a reference assessment,the performance of the CNBS-R2016 for detecting the developmental delays of children with ASD was analyzed with receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curves.The efficacy of the CNBS-R2016 to screen for ASD was explored by comparing Communication Warning Behavior with Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule,Second Edition(ADOS-2).Results In total,150 children aged 12–42 months with ASD were enrolled.The developmental quotients of the CNBS-R2016 were correlated with those of the GDS(r=0.62–0.94).The CNBS-R2016 and GDS had good diagnostic agreement for developmental delays(Kappa=0.73–0.89),except for Fine Motor.There was a significant difference between the proportions of Fine Motor,delays detected by the CNBS-R2016 and GDS(86.0%vs.77.3%).With GDS as a standard,the areas under the ROC curves of the CNBS-R2016 were above 0.95 for all the domains except Fine Motor,which was 0.70.In addition,the positive rate of ASD was 100.0%and 93.5%when the cut-off points of 7 and 12 in the Communication Warning Behavior subscale were used,respectively.Conclusion The CNBS-R2016 performed well in developmental assessment and screening for children with ASD,especially by Communication Warning Behaviors subscale.Therefore,the CNBS-R2016 is worthy of clinical application in children with ASD in China.
文摘The study examined the measurement invariance (configural,metric,scalar,and error variances) and factor mean scores equivalencies of a modified version of the Strengths and Weaknesses of ADHDSymptoms and Normal Behavior Scale (SWAN-M) across ratings provided by mothers of clinic-referred children and adolescents,diagnosed with (N = 666) and without (N = 202) ADHD. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of these ratings provided support for the bi-factor model of ADHD [orthogonal general and specific factors for inattention (IA) and hyperactivity/impulsivity (HI) symptoms]. Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the bi-factor model supported full measurement invariance. Findings also showed that for latent mean scores,the ADHD group had higher scores than the non-ADHD group for the ADHD general and IA specific factors. The findings indicate that observed scores (based on maternal ratings of the SWAN-M) are comparable,as they have the same measurement properties. The theoretical,psychometric and clinical implications of the findings are discussed.
文摘BACKGROUND Autism is the most common clinical developmental disorder in children.The childhood autism rating scale(CARS)and autistic autism behavior checklist(ABC)are the most commonly used assessment scales for diagnosing autism.However,the diagnostic validations and the corresponding cutoffs for CARS and ABC in individuals with suspected autism spectrum disorder(ASD)remain unclear.Furthermore,for suspected ASD in China,it remains unclear whether CARS is a better diagnostic tool than ABC.Also unclear is whether the current cutoff points for ABC and CARS are suitable for the accurate diagnosis of ASD.AIM To investigate the diagnostic validity of CARS and ABC based on a large Chinese sample.METHODS A total of 591 outpatient children from the ASD Unit at Beijing Children’s Hospital between June and November 2019 were identified.First,the Clancy autism behavior scale(CABS)was used to screen out suspected autism from these children.Then,each suspected ASD was evaluated by CARS and ABC.Receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve analysis was used to compare diagnostic validations.We also calculated the area under the curve(AUC)for both CARS and ABC.RESULTS We found that the Cronbach alpha coefficients of CARS and ABC were 0.772 and 0.426,respectively.Therefore,the reliability of the CARS was higher than that of the ABC.In addition,we found that the correlation between CARS and CABS was 0.732.Next,we performed ROC curve analysis for CARS and ABC,which yielded AUC values of 0.846 and 0.768,respectively.The cutoff value,which is associated with the maximum Youden index,is usually applied as a decision threshold.We found that the cutoff values of CARS and ABC were 34 and 67,respectively.CONCLUSION This result indicated that CARS is superior to ABC in the Chinese population with suspected ASD.
