| Title |
Brief Report: Can Metrics of Reporting Bias Enhance Early Autism Screening Measures?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-014-2099-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Cora M. Taylor, Alison Vehorn, Hylan Noble, Amy S. Weitlauf, Zachary E. Warren |
| Abstract |
The goal of the current study was to develop and pilot the utility of two simple internal response bias metrics, over-reporting and under-reporting, in terms of additive clinical value within common screening practices for early detection of autism spectrum disorder risk. Participants were caregivers and children under 36 months of age (n = 145) participating in first-time diagnostic appointments across our clinical research center due to developmental concerns. Caregivers were asked to complete the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (MCHAT) as well as a questionnaire embedding six response bias indicator questions. These questions were items that in previous clinical studies had been endorsed by an overwhelming majority of parents within clinically identified populations. Results indicated that removal of self-reports indicative of potential response bias dramatically reduced both false positives and false negatives on the MCHAT within this sample. This suggests that future work developing internal metrics of response bias may be promising in addressing limits of current screening measures and practices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 30% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 31 | 36% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 18% |
| Social Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 April 2014.
All research outputs
#3,837,740
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#1,566
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,198
of 228,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#24
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 228,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.