Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Laboratories of Cognitive Neuroscience, Division of Developmental Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Autism Res. 2023 May;16(5):981-996. doi: 10.1002/aur.2905. Epub 2023 Mar 16.
Clinical trials in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) often rely on clinician rating scales and parent surveys to measure autism-related features and social behaviors. To aid in the selection of these assessments for future clinical trials, the Autism Biomarkers Consortium for Clinical Trials (ABC-CT) directly compared eight common instruments with respect to acquisition rates, sensitivity to group differences, equivalence across demographic sub-groups, convergent validity, and stability over a 6-week period. The sample included 280 children diagnosed with ASD (65 girls) and 119 neurotypical children (36 girls) aged from 6 to 11 years. Full scale IQ for ASD ranged from 60 to 150 and for neurotypical ranged from 86 to 150. Instruments measured clinician global assessment and autism-related behaviors, social communication abilities, adaptive function, and social withdrawal behavior. For each instrument, we examined only the scales that measured social or communication functioning. Data acquisition rates were at least 97.5% at T1 and 95.7% at T2. All scales distinguished diagnostic groups. Some scales significantly differed by participant and/or family demographic characteristics. Within the ASD group, most clinical instruments exhibited weak (≥ |0.1|) to moderate (≥ |0.4|) intercorrelations. Short-term stability was moderate (ICC: 0.5-0.75) to excellent (ICC: >0.9) within the ASD group. Variations in the degree of stability may inform viability for different contexts of use, such as identifying clinical subgroups for trials versus serving as a modifiable clinical outcome. All instruments were evaluated in terms of their advantages and potential concerns for use in clinical trials.
自闭症谱系障碍 (ASD) 的临床试验通常依赖于临床医生评分量表和家长调查来衡量与自闭症相关的特征和社交行为。为了帮助在未来的临床试验中选择这些评估工具,自闭症生物标志物临床试验联盟 (ABC-CT) 直接比较了八种常见工具,评估了它们的采集率、对组间差异的敏感性、在人口统计学亚组中的等效性、收敛效度以及在 6 周内的稳定性。样本包括 280 名被诊断为 ASD 的儿童(65 名女孩)和 119 名神经典型儿童(36 名女孩),年龄在 6 至 11 岁之间。ASD 的全量表智商范围为 60 至 150,神经典型的智商范围为 86 至 150。工具测量了临床医生的整体评估和与自闭症相关的行为、社交沟通能力、适应功能和社交退缩行为。对于每种工具,我们只检查了测量社交或沟通功能的量表。在 T1 时,数据采集率至少为 97.5%,在 T2 时为 95.7%。所有量表都能区分诊断组。一些量表显著受参与者和/或家庭人口统计学特征的影响。在 ASD 组内,大多数临床工具表现出较弱(≥ |0.1|)到中度(≥ |0.4|)的相关性。在 ASD 组内,短期稳定性为中等(ICC:0.5-0.75)到优秀(ICC:>0.9)。稳定性的变化可能为不同的使用环境提供可行性,例如在试验中识别临床亚组与作为可修改的临床结果。所有工具都根据其在临床试验中的优势和潜在问题进行了评估。