ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Early Detection Methods for Autism Spectrum Disorder: From Clinical Screening to Multimodal AI.
Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in young children is essential for timely referral, developmental monitoring, and access to early intervention. However, conventional screening and diagnostic pathways often depend on parent-report instruments, episodic clinical observation, and specialist-administered assessments, which may delay identification during the first years of life. This scoping review maps the methodological landscape of early ASD detection from traditional clinical screening to multimodal artificial intelligence (AI). A structured literature search was conducted across major biomedical, psychological, and engineering databases for studies published between January 2010 and May 2026. After screening and eligibility assessment, 65 evidence sources were included in the qualitative synthesis, with additional methodological guidelines used to support reporting and appraisal. The reviewed evidence shows that early ASD detection is increasingly shifting from single-session clinical assessment toward multidimensional risk characterization. Clinical and behavioral screening tools remain the foundation of early identification, while eye tracking, video-based motor analysis, acoustic and vocal biomarkers, electroencephalography (EEG), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and molecular or genomic indicators provide complementary information across different developmental windows. AI-based methods, including machine learning, deep learning, Transformer architectures, multimodal fusion strategies, and foundation-model-based representation learning, may improve the objective quantification of gaze, movement, vocalization, neural activity, and biological risk. Nevertheless, most AI-assisted systems remain limited by small and heterogeneous datasets, insufficient external validation, population bias, privacy concerns, computational burden, and limited interpretability. This review argues that future early ASD detection systems should be developed as clinician-supervised decision-support tools rather than autonomous diagnostic instruments. Clinically meaningful progress will require robust external validation, privacy-preserving deployment, age-appropriate risk stratification, and intrinsically interpretable architectures that align model outputs with developmental and clinical knowledge.
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.