A meta-analysis of the social communication questionnaire: Screening for autism spectrum disorder

Abstract

The current meta-analysis examines the previous research on the utility of the Social Communication Questionnaire as a screening instrument for autism spectrum disorder. Previously published reports have highlighted the inconsistencies between Social Communication Questionnaire-screening results and formal autism spectrum disorder diagnoses. The variations in accuracy resulted in some researchers questioning the validity of the Social Communication Questionnaire. This study systematically examined the accuracy of the Social Communication Questionnaire as a function of the methodological decisions made by researchers screening for autism spectrum disorder over the last 15 years. Findings from this study suggest that the Social Communication Questionnaire is an acceptable screening instrument for autism spectrum disorder (area under the curve = 0.885). Variations in methodological decisions, however, greatly influenced the accuracy of the Social Communication Questionnaire in screening for autism spectrum disorder. Of these methodological variations, using the Current instead of the Lifetime version of the Social Communication Questionnaire resulted in the largest detrimental effect ( d = -3.898), followed by using the Social Communication Questionnaire with individuals younger than 4 years of age ( d = -2.924) and relying upon convenience samples ( d = -4.828 for clinical samples, -2.734 for convenience samples, and -1.422 for community samples). Directions for future research and implications for using the Social Communication Questionnaire to screen for autism spectrum disorder are discussed.

Brief Report: An Evaluation of the Social Communication Questionnaire as a Screening Tool for Autism Spectrum Disorder in Young People Referred to Child & Adolescent Mental Health Services

“…The AUC is considered a useful metric when considering screening measures (and diagnostic tests more broadly) as it provides a summary measure of test accuracy, taking into account both test sensitivity and specificity. Whilst other studies since this time have raised some questions about the accuracy of the SCQ as a screening tool (Corsello et al, 2007;Snow et al, 2008), a recent metaanalysis has suggested that overall the SCQ is an acceptable screening instrument for ASD but that its accuracy varies greatly depending on factors such as age at assessment, the version used and sampling strategy (Chesnut, Wei, Barnard-Brak, & Richman, 2016).…”

The Social Communication Questionnaire for adults with intellectual disability: SCQ‐AID

“…Therefore, appropriate standardized instruments are important and may support researchers and clinicians in the diagnostic decision [Hare, Mellor, & Azmi, ; La Malfa et al, ]. Although the SCQ has been validated across a wide range of ages and levels of intellectual functioning [Chesnut et al, ; National Institute of Health and Care Excellence, ; Sappok et al, ], there are few studies examining this instrument in adults with ID, a population that is particularly at risk for ASD. Improved recognition of ASD in adults with ID may not only increase quality of life and mental health of the affected individuals and their families by providing a better chance for more appropriate treatment and care, but also may lead to improved outcomes and as a result lower costs to the economy [National Audit Office, ].…”

“…In addition, it should be taken into account, that the SCQ current was used in this analysis and in a current meta-analysis, Chesnut et al [1016] has shown that the current form tends to have a lower diagnostic accuracy compared to the SCQ lifetime. However, this is not the case in adults with ID as shown by Sappok, Brooks, Heinrich, McCarthy, and Underwood [2016], especially in those with more severe ID.…”

“…The SCQ is based on the diagnostic criteria of DSM‐IV and the items of the Autism Diagnostic Interview Revised (ADI‐R) [Le Couteur et al, ]. Numerous validation studies have shown that the SCQ is a psychometrically sound and valuable screening instrument for children and young adolescents [e.g., Chesnut, Wei, Barnard‐Brak, & Richman, ; Norris & Lecavalier, ]. However, few studies have examined it in adults with ID [Brooks & Benson, ; Sappok et al, ; Underwood, McCarthy, & Chaplin, ].…”

Interrelationship Between Cognitive Control, Anxiety, and Restricted and Repetitive Behaviors in Children with 22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome

“…The social communication questionnaire [SCQ; Rutter, Bailey, & Lord, 2003] is a 40-item parent-report questionnaire designed to index the severity of impairments in social, communication, and repetitive behavior domains. It was originally suggested [Berument, Rutter, Lord, Pickles, & Bailey, 1999] that a cutoff score of 15 represents an optimal balance between sensitivity (0.85) and specificity (0.75) when screening for ASD, however, a recent metaanalysis by Chesnut, Wei, Barnard-Brak, and Richman [2017] suggests a cutoff score of 11 as more optimal (area under the curve = 0.885). Both the cutoff of 11 and 15 were used in this article.…”