Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31802957›Full record

ArticlePsychology research and behavior management2019

Comparison Of The Children Neuropsychological And Behavior Scale And The Griffiths Mental Development Scales When Assessing The Development Of Children With Autism.

Hong-Hua Li, Jun-Yan Feng, Bing Wang, Yu Zhang, Cheng-Xin Wang, Fei-Yong Jia

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology research and behavior management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hong-Hua LiDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-8429-5894
Jun-Yan FengDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.
Bing WangDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0001-6058-6929
Yu ZhangDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.
Cheng-Xin WangDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.
Fei-Yong JiaDepartment of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, Jilin 130021, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe newly revised Children Neuropsychological and Behavior Scale (CNBS-R2016) is a diagnostic assessment tool widely used in China to assess the developmental level of children aged 0 to 6 years. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the effectiveness of developmental assessment in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) by the CNBS-R2016 was consistent with that of the Griffiths Mental Development Scales for China (GDS-C).

methodsIn total, 139 children with ASD were recruited in this study. The Autism Behavior Checklist (ABC) and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) were used to measure ASD severity. All subjects were evaluated with both the CNBS-R2016 and GDS-C. To determine the consistency between the CNBS-R2016 and GDS-C, Pearson correlation coefficients and Bland-Altman plots were computed. The GDS-C was used as a reference assessment, and the performance of the CNBS-R2016 was analyzed with receiver operating curves.

resultsNo significant difference was found between the proportions of developmental delays detected by the CNBS-R2016 subscales and the corresponding GDS-C subscales. The CNBS-R2016 Communication Warning Behavior subscale quotients and the total ABC and CARS scores were significantly and positively correlated. The general and subscale quotients of the CNBS-R2016 and the corresponding quotient of the GDS-C were also significantly and positively correlated. The area under all the curves of the CNBS-R2016 was above 0.8 according to the results of the GDS-C (general or subscale quotient <70 indicates a developmental delay), and Bland-Altman plots showed no systemic bias between the two scales.

conclusionThe CNBS-R2016 and GDS-C tests showed good consistency in the developmental assessment of children with ASD. In addition, the CNBS-R2016 allows the simultaneous assessment of autism symptoms and the developmental level. Therefore, the CNBS-R2016 is worthy of clinical application in children aged 0-6 years.

Indexed as

autism spectrum disorderschildrenChildren Neuropsychological and Behavior Scaledevelopmental assessmentGriffiths Mental Development Scales

Identifiers

PMID31802957
PMCPMC6801569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.