ArticleInternational journal of developmental disabilities2024
The differential diagnostic utility of the social communication questionnaire in mild intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder: a case control study.
Article in International journal of developmental disabilities, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study investigated the utility of specific predictive and discriminative items within the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ) for distinguishing between autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disability (ID), and co-occurring ASD + ID in children. Methods: A total of 137 children aged 4 to 12 years (52 typically developing (TD), 34 ASD, 26 ID, 25 ASD + ID) were included in the study. Cognitive development assessments were conducted for the ASD, ID, and ASD + ID groups in suitable cases. SCQ items were evaluated both in terms of total and subscale scores and individual items across groups. Results: The TD group had the lowest scores on the SCQ, while the ID group had significantly lower total and communication subscale scores on the SCQ compared to the ASD group. Additionally, there were no significant differences in SCQ scores between the ASD group and the co-occurring ASD + ID group. The ID group had lower scores on both the communication subscale and the total SCQ compared to the co-occurring ASD + ID group. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis of SCQ total scores for differentiating the ASD + ID group from the ID group revealed an AUC of 0.834 for the total score, with a cutoff of 16.50 (sensitivity: 76%, specificity: 80.8%). Logistic regression identified 29 significant predictors distinguishing ASD + ID from ID, with absence of 'Group play' ( Conclusions: This study highlights the potential of using the SCQ alongside clinical assessments to diagnose ASD in individuals with ID, emphasizing non-verbal communication, participation in group play, presence of close or best friends, and range of facial expression as key distinguishing factors. Further research with larger samples and comparisons of educational interventions based on these indicators is essential for developing tailored educational programs for the ASD + ID group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.