VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE THAI VERSION OF THE AUTISM TREATMENT EVALUATION CHECKLIST
Keywords:
Thai version Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist, validity, reliabilityAbstract
This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Thai version of the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC). This tool was developed for Thai parents and caregivers of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Ethical approval was obtained from the relevant ethics committee and the original developers of the ATEC. The study was conducted in two phases. Phase 1 involved the forward-backward translation of the original checklist. Phase 2 focused on testing the psychometric properties, specifically the validity and reliability of the tool. The validity was assessed by comparing the Thai-ATEC scores of parents and caregivers of 160 children with assessments by a child and adolescent psychiatrist using DSM-V criteria on the same group of children. The inter-rater reliability was tested using a two-way model of intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) for two-parent/caregiver assessments of 50 children with ASD.
The validity of the Thai-ATEC was found to be moderate to high. A cut-off point of ≤38 scores effectively distinguished between children with mild ASD symptoms and others (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 61.9%, area under the ROC curve = 90%). Conversely, a cut-off point of ≥68 scores distinguished between children with severe ASD symptoms and others (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 62.8%, area under the ROC curve = 85%). The inter-rater reliability was robust, with an ICC of 0.97.
Downloads
References
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorder: DSM-IV-TR. 4th ed. Washington DC: APA; 2000.
American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic Criteria From DSM-5. Washington DC: APA; 2013.
World Health Organization: Meeting report: autism spectrum disorders and other developmental disorders: from raising awareness to building capacity. 2013 Sep 16–18; Geneva Switzerland.
Kopetz PB, Endowed ED. Autism worldwide: prevalence perceptions acceptance action. J Soc Sci. 2012; 8(2): 196–201.
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Autism: Recognition Referral and Diagnosis of Children and Young People on the Autism Spectrum. London: NICE; 2011.
Lord C, Rutter M, Le Couteur A. Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised: a revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of autism and developmental disorders 1994; 24(5): 659–685.
Lord C, Risi S, Lambrecht L, Cook E. Leventhal BL, DiLavore PC, Pickles A. The autism diagnostic observation schedule-generic: a standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of autism and developmental disorders 2000; 30(3): 205–223.
Schopler E, Reichler RJ, DeVellis RF, Daly K. Toward objective classification of childhood autism: Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS). Journal of autism and developmental disorders 1980; 10(1): 91–103.
Green J, Charman T, McConachie H, Aldred C, Slonims V, Howlin P, et al. Parent-mediated communication-focused treatment in children with autism (PACT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010; 375(9732): 2152-2160.
Magiati I, Moss J, Yates R, Charman T, Howlin P. Is the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist a useful tool for monitoring progress in children with autism spectrum disorders?. Journal of intellectual disability research: JIDR 2011; 55(3): 302–312.
Rimland B, Edelson SM.Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC) [online] 2000 [cited 2016 May 6]. Available from: https://autism. org/autism-treatment-evaluation-checklist/
Weiner RH, Greene RL. Intention-based therapy for autism spectrum disorder: promising results of a wait-list control study in children. Explore 2014; 10(1): 13–23.
Jarusiewicz B. Efficacy of neurofeedback for children in the autistic spectrum: a pilot study. J Neurother 2002; 6(4): 39–49.
Freire MH, André AM, Kummer AME. Test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC). Jornal Brasileiro de Psiquiatria 2018; 67(1): 63-64.
Geier DA, Kern JK, Geier MR, A Comparison of the Autism Treatment Evaluation Checklist (ATEC) and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) for the Quantitative Evaluation of Autism. J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil 2013; 6(4): 255–267.
Russell PS, Daniel A, Russell S, Mammen P, Abel JS, Raj LE, et al. Diagnostic accuracy, reliability and validity of Childhood Autism Rating Scale in India. World J Pediatrb 2010; 6(2): 141-147.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25(24): 3186–3191.
Dale E, Jahoda A, Knott F. Mothers' attributions following their child's diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorder: exploring links with maternal levels of stress, depression and expectations about their child's future. Autism: the international journal of research and practice 2006; 10(5): 463-479.
Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Community Health Development Quarterly Khon Kaen University
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles in this journal are copyrighted by the x may be read and used for academic purposes, such as teaching, research, or citation, with proper credit given to the author and the journal.use or modification of the articles is prohibited without permission.
statements expressed in the articles are solely the opinions of the authors.
authors are fully responsible for the content and accuracy of their articles.
other reuse or republication requires permission from the journal."
