ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2025
Cross-Cultural Generalizability of the First Year Inventory for Early ASD Screening in China.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The First Year Inventory (FYI) is a parent report screening measure, aimed at identifying the risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in 12-month-old infants. This study aimed to investigate the utility of FYI within the Chinese community and develop a short version, encompassing both a low-risk sample and a high-risk sample comprising infants with older siblings diagnosed with ASD. Parents of 53 high-risk (HR) infants and 519 low-risk (LR) infants, aged 11 to 13 months, were recruited. After comparing response distributions across Chinese and American samples, a new factorial structure was developed according to the factor analyses. The construct validity and internal consistency of the two FYI versions were examined. The implementation of FYI in the HR sample was also assessed. Noteworthy disparities in response distribution were observed between the Chinese and American samples. Both FYI 2.0 and the FYI short version demonstrated moderate construct validity and internal consistency, with the FYI short version exhibiting better predictive ability in the HR sample. Significant lower risk scores was observed in the HR sample compared to the LR sample. These findings substantiate the applicability and validity of the Chinese short version of FYI. Future research should include follow-up assessments with the Chinese sample to evaluate cutoff scores, considering the cutoff between sensitivity and specificity and the sample?s characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38700779What 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.