ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2025
Psychometric Properties of Measuring Tools for Depression in Autistic Youths: A Systematic Review.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While autistic individuals are 4 times more likely to have depression compared to non-autistic individuals, depression remained largely undetected in this group resulting in significant unmet needs. A systematic literature review was conducted to determine the psychometric properties of measuring tools for depressive symptoms in autistic children and adolescents. The review followed the PRISMA 2020 guideline (PROSPERO: CRD42023423377) based on the search of several databases from 1980 until November 2024. The COnsensus-based Standards for the Selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist was used to assess for each tool: internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, content validity, structural validity, hypothesis testing, criterion validity, responsiveness to change and cross-cultural validity. The review found 15 empirical studies evaluating the properties of twelve measuring tools for depression in autistic youths. The validities of standards screening scales were low, but better for questionnaires with items focusing on behavioral aspects of depression, i.e., the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The evidence supporting the quality of the instrument was much better for those developed for subjects with neurodevelopmental divergences, such as The Evaluation of Depressive symptoms in Autism (EDA), with five domains of psychometric properties rated as strong or moderate. To determine the optimal approach for the use of consensual instruments, further research should include more individuals with co-occurring neurodevelopmental conditions, a risk factor for a more resistant form of depression, and examine the instruments' capacity to detect clinically significant changes during an intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40833659What 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.