ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2025
Brief Report: Differences Between Stanford-Binet Abbreviated and Full-Scale Estimates of IQ in Fragile X Syndrome Vary Across Development.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFragile X syndrome (FXS) is the most common inherited cause of intellectual disability and single-gene cause of autism. The Stanford-Binet, Fifth Edition (SB-5) is commonly used to assess IQ in FXS. It is not known if the SB-5 routing form's abbreviated IQ (ABIQ) score accurately estimates full-scale IQ (FSIQ), limiting data-informed decision-making when choosing between an abbreviated or full SB-5 battery.
methods198 participants with FXS (143 males) aged 4 to 47 years of age completed the full SB-5. We calculated differences between abbreviated and full-scale estimates of IQ and assessed the extent to which the agreement between ABIQ and FSIQ varied as a function of age, routing subtest scatter, and FSIQ.
resultsThe abbreviated SB-5 battery over-estimated FSIQ in most school-age children (< 11 years), and under-estimated FSIQ in adolescents and adults. This under-estimate of FSIQ was larger when there was a greater discrepancy (scatter) between the two routing subtests that comprise ABIQ and in individuals with FSIQ < 68.
conclusionClinicians and researchers should consider administering the full SB-5 battery to individuals with FXS when possible. If only an abbreviated estimate of IQ is available, ABIQ should be interpreted with caution based on our findings of over- or under-estimation occurring across development. Large discrepancies between verbal and nonverbal skills as well as greater severity of ID should both serve as cues to administer the full battery to avoid under-estimating cognitive skills that are otherwise only captured by FSIQ.
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.