This preprint is under consideration at BMC Psychiatry. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
Research article
Ying Li
Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children's Health
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1800-0901
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Autism is the most common clinical developmental disorder in children. The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) and Autistic Behavior Checklist (ABC) are the most commonly used assessment scales for diagnosing autism. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic validities of CARS and ABC based on a large Chinese sample.
Methods: A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compare the diagnostic validities of CARS and ABC, as well as the corresponding cut-off determinations was calculated.
Results: A total of 474 children with suspected autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were screened by CARS and ABC. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed and it showed that the area-under-the-curve values of CARS is higher than ABC significantly (p <0.05) and the suggested cutoff values of CARS and ABC were 34 and 67, respectively.
Conclusion: This study demonstrated that CARS was superior to ABC in terms of its diagnostic validity of assessing suspected ASD cases in children. Based on our results, we recommend the CARS could be used for the assessments for suspected ASD cases in Chinses hospitals.
Keywords
Suspected ASD, CARS, ABC, ROC curve
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 2
Posted 23 Oct, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 07 Apr, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 01 Apr, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 24 Mar, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 14 Mar, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 13 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Oct, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 25 Sep, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 23 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 13 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 27 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 21 Aug, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 13 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 Aug, 2020
First submitted
On 04 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 04 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Psychiatry
Learn more about our company.
A new preprint design is coming!
We have improved readability, clarity, accessibility, and opportunities for engagement.
This preprint is under consideration at BMC Psychiatry. A preprint is a preliminary version of a manuscript that has not completed peer review at a journal. Research Square does not conduct peer review prior to posting preprints. The posting of a preprint on this server should not be interpreted as an endorsement of its validity or suitability for dissemination as established information or for guiding clinical practice.
Learn more about In Review
Research article
Ying Li
Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, National Center for Children's Health
Corresponding Author
ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1800-0901
Badges
Prescreen
This manuscript passed our Prescreen assessment
Complete author information
Appropriate declaration statements
Potential risks to human health
Prescreen
Peer Review Timeline
CURRENT STATUS: Under Review
Version 2
Posted 23 Oct, 2020
No community comments so far
Editorial decision: Major revision
On 07 Apr, 2021
Review #2 received
Received 01 Apr, 2021
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 24 Mar, 2021
Review #1 received
Received 14 Mar, 2021
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 13 Dec, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 29 Nov, 2020
Editor assigned
On 13 Oct, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 12 Oct, 2020
Editor invited
On 12 Oct, 2020
No comments provided
Editorial decision: Minor revision
On 25 Sep, 2020
Review #2 received
Received 23 Sep, 2020
Reviewer #2 agreed
On 13 Sep, 2020
Review #1 received
Received 27 Aug, 2020
Reviewer #1 agreed
On 21 Aug, 2020
Reviewers invited
Invitations sent on 13 Aug, 2020
Editor assigned
On 05 Aug, 2020
First submitted
On 04 Aug, 2020
Submission checks complete
On 04 Aug, 2020
Editor invited
On 04 Aug, 2020
Metrics
Comments: 0
PDF Downloads: ...
HTML Views: ...
Subject Areas
Psychiatry
License:
This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License. Read Full License
Background: Autism is the most common clinical developmental disorder in children. The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) and Autistic Behavior Checklist (ABC) are the most commonly used assessment scales for diagnosing autism. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic validities of CARS and ABC based on a large Chinese sample.
Methods: A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to compare the diagnostic validities of CARS and ABC, as well as the corresponding cut-off determinations was calculated.
Results: A total of 474 children with suspected autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were screened by CARS and ABC. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed and it showed that the area-under-the-curve values of CARS is higher than ABC significantly (p <0.05) and the suggested cutoff values of CARS and ABC were 34 and 67, respectively.
Conclusion: This study demonstrated that CARS was superior to ABC in terms of its diagnostic validity of assessing suspected ASD cases in children. Based on our results, we recommend the CARS could be used for the assessments for suspected ASD cases in Chinses hospitals.
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Loading...