ArticleAutism : the international journal of research and practice2025
Consensus recommendations for usability and acceptability of mobile health autism screening tools.
Article in Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2025. 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.
- Consensus recommendations for usability and acceptability of mobile health autism screening tools.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mobile health (mHealth; online phone or tablet-based) screening tools for autism are being increasingly used by parents, health care, and educational providers. However, it is unclear whether mHealth autism screening will improve the inequalities in autism or further help individuals already advantaged in autism care. To try to improve equity in mHealth autism screening, we conducted a modified Delphi consensus panel process with 14 panelists who were medical providers, parents, tool developers, and educational providers. Panelists participated in three asynchronous online voting rounds followed by online discussions. Panelists were provided a preliminary list of 28 recommendations for autism-screening tools that were compiled from previous qualitative interviews in the larger project. In each round, panelists were asked to vote for up to 10 recommendations from the preliminary list and discuss the voting results. After the third round of asynchronous voting, a final round of discussion with all the panelists was held live through Zoom to discuss the final asynchronous voting results. All voting and discussion took place on an online app called Slack. Voting and discussion yielded 19 recommendations in five conceptual categories: transparency, equity, access, product design and user experience, and development process. Tools adhering to these recommendations may increase equitable service use after screening.Lay abstractFamilies may use information online to learn more about autism. Families, health care, and educational providers may use online tools like checklists or web apps to screen for autism (measure whether a young child has autism symptoms or behaviors). However, we do not know whether the online autism-screening tools can be easily used by families and providers. It is possible that families who are culturally diverse, have lower education, or have lower income have trouble using online autism-screening tools. We conducted an online consensus panel with medical/educational providers, parents, and tool developers, asking them to vote and have discussions on suggestions for online screening tools for autism. The voting and discussions resulted in 19 suggestions for changes to make the tools easier to use. The top recommendations included directly linking to sources of information about autism, reading level that is less than or equal to fifth grade, and focusing on the diverse behavior/needs/strengths associated with autism.
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.