Cited by 1,081Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesFamily and Disability Support Research

Validation of the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised With Follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F)

Open access
Robins, Diana L., Casagrande, Karís, Barton, Marianne, Chen, Chi-Ming A., Dumont-Mathieu, Thyde, Fein, Deborah·2014·Pediatrics

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study validates the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F), a screening tool for low-risk toddlers, and demonstrates improved utility compared with the original M-CHAT. METHODS: Toddlers (N = 16,071) were screened during 18- and 24-month well-child care visits in metropolitan Atlanta and Connecticut. Parents of toddlers at risk on M-CHAT-R completed follow-up; those who continued to show risk were evaluated. RESULTS: The reliability and validity of the M-CHAT-R/F were demonstrated, and optimal scoring was determined by using receiver operating characteristic curves. Children whose total score was ≥ 3 initially and ≥ 2 after follow-up had a 47.5% risk of being diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD; confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.41-0.54) and a 94.6% risk of any developmental delay or concern (95% CI: 0.92-0.98). Total score was more effective than alternative scores. An algorithm based on 3 risk levels is recommended to maximize clinical utility and to reduce age of diagnosis and onset of early intervention. The M-CHAT-R detects ASD at a higher rate compared with the M-CHAT while also reducing the number of children needing the follow-up. Children in the current study were diagnosed 2 years younger than the national median age of diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The M-CHAT-R/F detects many cases of ASD in toddlers; physicians using the 2-stage screener can be confident that most screen-positive cases warrant evaluation and referral for early intervention. Widespread implementation of universal screening can lower the age of ASD diagnosis by 2 years compared with recent surveillance findings, increasing time available for early intervention.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2013-1813

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mild early language delays are quite common in many conditions and are not specific to autism.

    “mild early language delays are quite common in many conditions and are not specific to autism (Robins et al. 2014, Wetherby et al. 2002)”

    From Recent Advances in Autism Research as Reflected in DSM-5 Criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder (2015) · cites this paper as Robins et al. 2014

    The Methods section treats language delay as a possible diagnosis when ASD is ruled out, and Table 2 records 25 evaluated children with a non-ASD language diagnosis. This supports the point that language delay is not specific to autism, but the paper does not establish that mild early language delays are common across many conditions. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A positive screen on the M-CHAT-R/F relates to a 47.5% risk of autism and a 94.6% risk of any developmental disorder.

    “Specifically, the original MCHAT-R/F validation study found that a positive screen relates to a 47.5% risk of autism and a much higher (94.6%) risk of any developmental disorder (Robins et al., 2014).”

    From Parenting Stress, Child Social Functioning, and Part C Early Intervention in Predominantly Low-Income Families of Children With or at High Risk for Developmental Delay From Minoritized Racial and Ethnic Groups (2023) · cites this paper as Robins et al., 2014

    The Results report that 47.5% of children who screened positive on the two-stage M-CHAT-R/F were diagnosed with ASD. They also report 94.6% with any developmental delay or concern, but that figure includes 11.3% who had concerns without a formal diagnosis; it is not a 94.6% risk of a developmental disorder. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Study personnel re-administered the M-CHAT-R/F following standard procedures to all potentially eligible families to ensure its standard administration.

    “Study personnel re-administered the M-CHAT-R/F (Robins et al., 2014) following standard procedures to all potentially eligible families to ensure its standard administration and invited those with positive screens to participate.”
  • Universal early autism-specific screening can decrease the average age of autism diagnosis.

    “It has been shown that universal early autism-specific screening can decrease the average age of diagnosis (Robins et al., 2014)”
  • ASD risk can be measured as young as 12 to 24 months using parent report screening tools such as the CSBS IT-Checklist and M-CHAT at well-baby check-ups with follow-up confirmation at ASD specialty clinics.

    “Studies demonstrate that ASD risk can be measured as young as 12 to 24 months using parent report screening tools such as the CSBS IT-Checklist and M-CHAT at well-baby check-ups with follow-up confirmation at ASD specialty clinics [179, 180].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [18]Barton M, Boorstein H, Herlihy L, Dumont-Mathieu T, Fein D. Toddler ASD Symptom Interview. Self-published; 2012 [Google Scholar]
  2. [20]Sparrow SS, Cicchetti DV, Balla DA. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. 2nd ed. (Vineland II) Survey Interview Form/Caregiver Rating Form. Livonia, MN: Pearson Assessments; 2005 [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Robins, D. L., Casagrande, K., Barton, M., Chen, C.-M. A., Dumont-Mathieu, T., & Fein, D.
Affiliations
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • University of Connecticut (US)
Venue
Pediatrics
Published
2013-12-23
Volume
133
Issue
1
Pages
37-45
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W2137207936
Cited by
1,081
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 107 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 127 · 2023: 113 · 2022: 94 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 97 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 84 · 2017: 44 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 43 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
22.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD039961)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
M-CHAT-R/F, autism spectrum disorder, autism screening, toddlers, screening validity, developmental delay, early intervention, age at diagnosis, universal screening, well-child care
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Developmental Disabilities, Child Development Disorders, Pervasive, Child, Preschool, Decision Support Techniques, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Infant, Male, Psychological Tests, ROC Curve, Reproducibility of Results, Early Diagnosis, Checklist

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review