- Systematic review evaluated 33 ASD screening measures across 68 studies using COSMIN; most were questionnaires and M-CHAT was most extensively tested.
- Measurement properties varied by age, informant and culture; some studies reported excellent reliability, content, cross-cultural and criterion validity for specific instruments.
- Evidence was inconsistent; careful tool selection is required and further validation studies are needed for all ASD screening measures.
Curr Pediatr Rev. 2026 Sep 26. doi: 10.2174/0115733963434363260911043005. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study provides a systematic review of screening tools for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and evaluates their psychometric and measurement properties.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was first conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases. This search was conducted until 3 February 2022 to identify the best psychometric tools in various communities for screening patients with ASD. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist.
RESULTS: The study included 68 papers and 33 measures; most of them were questionnaires, and the M-CHAT was the most extensively tested. According to the COSMIN checklist, the reliability of one study that used BSIQ for evaluation was excellent. The content validity of a study that used BISCUIT for evaluation was excellent. The hypothesis test was fully explained in 4 studies that used Q-CHAT, FYI, BITSEA, and CBCL1.5-5 tools for evaluation and got a perfect score. The crosscultural validity of a study that used M-CHAT was excellent. The criterion validity of 3 studies that used M-CHAT, BITSEA, and ASSQ was reported as excellent.
DISCUSSION: ASD screening tools vary in quality based on age, informant, and culture. Some have solid validity and reliability, but evidence is inconsistent, stressing the need for careful interpretation and further validation.
CONCLUSION: Each ASD screening tool assesses specific skills and various aspects of the disorder; careful evaluation is needed to select the appropriate tool. However, the results of this study highlighted the need for additional validation studies for all the measures.
PMID:42817000 | DOI:10.2174/0115733963434363260911043005
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes
Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List
