ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2020
Utility of the Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale in the Assessment of Autism Spectrum Disorders.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transparent deep learning to identify autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in EHR using clinical notes.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Investigated internal consistency reliability and criterion validity of the Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale (ASDS) in a well-characterized sample of 120 children ([Formula: see text] = 9.91; autism [AUT] n = 54; non-autism [NOT] n = 66) who completed comprehensive outpatient evaluations with a gold-standard measure, the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2. With the exception of a low Cognitive alpha in the AUT group, internal consistency reliabilities ranged from moderate to high. Significant between-group mean differences were observed for all scores. Receiver operating characteristic analyses indicated Area Under the Curve in the fair range (.71). Cutoff points and interpretation are discussed. The ASDS appears most useful in cases of either low or high scores or as an adjuvant to gold-standard measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31673910What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.