Smith Corinna, Lautarescu Alexandra, Charman Tony, Crosbie Jennifer, Schachar Russell J, Iaboni Alana, Georgiades Stelios, Nicolson Robert, Kelley Elizabeth, Ayub Muhammad, Jones Jessica, Arnold Paul D, Lerch Jason P, Anagnostou Evdokia, Kushki Azadeh
Autism Research Centre, Bloorview Research Institute, Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, 150 Kilgour Road, Toronto, ON, M4G 1R8, Canada.
Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Mol Autism. 2024 Dec 3;15(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s13229-024-00630-4.
Very large sample sizes are often needed to capture heterogeneity in autism, necessitating data sharing across multiple studies with diverse assessment instruments. In these cases, data harmonization can be a critical tool for deriving a single dataset for analysis. This can be done through computational approaches that enable the conversion of scores across various instruments. To this end, our study examined the use of analytical approaches for mapping scores on two measures of adaptive functioning, namely predicting the scores on the vineland adaptive behavior scales II (VABS) from the scores on the adaptive behavior assessment system II (ABAS).
Data from the province of Ontario neurodevelopmental disorders network were used. The dataset included scores VABS and the ABAS for 720 participants (autism n = 547, 433 male, age: 11.31 ± 3.63 years; neurotypical n = 173, 95 male, age: 12.53 ± 4.05 years). Six regression approaches (ordinary least squares (OLS) linear regression, ridge regression, ElasticNet, LASSO, AdaBoost, random forest) were used to predict VABS total scores from the ABAS scores, demographic variables (age, sex), and phenotypic measures (diagnosis; core and co-occurring features; IQ; internalizing and externalizing symptoms).
The VABS scores were significantly higher than the ABAS scores in the autism group, but not the neurotypical group (median difference: 8, 95% CI = (7,9)). The difference was negatively associated with age (beta = -1.2 ± 0.12, t = -10.6, p < 0.0001). All estimators demonstrated similar performance, with no statistically significant differences in mean absolute error (MAE) values across estimators (MAE range: 4.96-6.91). The highest contributing features to the prediction model were ABAS composite score, diagnosis, and age.
This study has several strengths, including the large sample. We did not examine the conversion of domain scores across the two measures of adaptive functioning and suggest this as a future area of investigation.
Overall, our results supported the feasibility of harmonization. Our results suggest that a linear regression model trained on the ABAS composite score, the ABAS raw domain scores, and age, sex, and diagnosis would provide an acceptable trade-off between accuracy, parsimony, and data collection and processing complexity.
通常需要非常大的样本量来捕捉自闭症的异质性,这就需要在多项研究中使用不同的评估工具进行数据共享。在这些情况下,数据协调可以成为生成单一分析数据集的关键工具。这可以通过计算方法来实现,这些方法能够转换不同工具的得分。为此,我们的研究考察了用于映射两项适应性功能测量得分的分析方法,即根据适应性行为评估系统II(ABAS)的得分预测文兰适应性行为量表II(VABS)的得分。
使用了安大略省神经发育障碍网络的数据。该数据集包括720名参与者的VABS和ABAS得分(自闭症患者n = 547,男性433名,年龄:11.31±3.63岁;典型神经发育个体n = 173,男性95名,年龄:12.53±4.05岁)。使用六种回归方法(普通最小二乘法(OLS)线性回归、岭回归、弹性网络回归、套索回归、AdaBoost、随机森林)从ABAS得分、人口统计学变量(年龄、性别)和表型测量指标(诊断;核心及共病特征;智商;内化和外化症状)预测VABS总分。
自闭症组的VABS得分显著高于ABAS得分,但典型神经发育个体组并非如此(中位数差异:8,95%置信区间=(7,9))。该差异与年龄呈负相关(β = -1.2±0.12,t = -10.6,p < 0.0001)。所有估计器表现出相似的性能,各估计器的平均绝对误差(MAE)值无统计学显著差异(MAE范围:4.96 - 6.91)。对预测模型贡献最大的特征是ABAS综合得分、诊断和年龄。
本研究有多个优点,包括样本量大。我们没有考察两项适应性功能测量指标的领域得分转换情况,并建议将此作为未来的一个研究领域。
总体而言,我们的结果支持了协调的可行性。我们的结果表明,基于ABAS综合得分、ABAS原始领域得分以及年龄、性别和诊断训练的线性回归模型将在准确性、简约性以及数据收集和处理复杂性之间提供可接受的权衡。