59), widely regarded as the gold standard in measuring autism symptom severity. In fact, it had a strong correlation with the ADOS-2 (in two samples. The autism risk index also was successful at indicating severity of autism symptoms. Frazier is quick to note that the SRS-2 is intended for screening purposes, and this was an already-screened, high-risk sample.)
The SRS-2 performed at chance levels, with approximately 50 percent accuracy. Out of 39 children diagnosed with a non-ASD neuropsychiatric disorder, the risk index again correctly identified 32 (82 percent). Out of 40 children diagnosed with ASD, the risk index correctly identified 32 (80 percent). When compared with clinical diagnoses, autism risk index scores were remarkably accurate - even outperforming the SRS-2. A score of +1.5 indicates borderline risk of ASD a score of +2.0 indicates elevated risk. The index is a quantitative continuous measure with a mean score of 0. “We built the index based on our hypothesis that children with ASD gaze longer at nonsocial targets, like a door hinge, and less at social targets, like a person’s face,” says Dr. Researchers then averaged looking times, and compared them to standardized looking times of children without ASD, to generate an autism risk index. Throughout each 7-minute evaluation, the remote eye tracker recorded how long children looked at predefined regions of interest (e.g., faces, body movements). Visual stimuli included both photos and videos of “social” subjects, such as an adult with a selection of toys and a child telling a joke, and “nonsocial” subjects, such as inanimate objects and geometric shapes. In a quiet, sparse room, children sat alone or on their parent’s lap in front of a monitor on which visual stimuli would appear. Researchers (who were blinded to the diagnoses) conducted eye-gaze tracking for each child, using an LCD monitor with a remote eye tracker. All had been referred for ASD evaluation by their pediatrician and were subsequently diagnosed as having either ASD or another (non-ASD) developmental disorder, based on clinical consensus. Frazier and his team at Cleveland Clinic Children’s evaluated two samples of children, ages 3 to 8. Fixations on nonsocial stimuli, while a common indicator of ASD, traditionally have been identified only by clinical observation. And by using various stimuli, remote eye tracking can gauge attention to various social or nonsocial targets.
It makes data easy to collect, even from young children. Unlike earlier versions of eye tracking, which required headgear or even more disruptive methods such as MRI or EEG, remote eye tracking is as comfortable and natural as watching TV. Frazier and his team of researchers hypothesized that remote eye-tracking technology could objectively indicate the presence of autism, and possibly its severity. They differentiate ASD from other developmental neuropsychiatric disorders. Why eyes are the focusĪbnormal eye gaze and social attention patterns are indicators of ASD. The feasibility of using remote eye-gaze tracking to diagnose ASD was reported in the April 2016 issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. “And it may help the diagnosis to be accepted more easily by parents wary of relying on clinical impressions alone.” “Having a quantitative measure of ASD symptoms could substantially increase the accuracy of clinical diagnosis,” says Thomas Frazier, PhD, Director of Cleveland Clinic Children’s Center for Autism. We do not endorse non-Cleveland Clinic products or services Policyīut now a team from Cleveland Clinic Children’s Center for Autism has developed what may become ASD’s first objective diagnostic aid: an autism risk index based on remote eye-gaze tracking. Advertising on our site helps support our mission. Cleveland Clinic is a non-profit academic medical center.
0 kommentar(er)
