Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Automated Diagnosis of Autism With Artificial Intelligence: State of the Art Publisher Pubmed



Valizadeh A2 ; Moassefi M2 ; Nakhostinansari A3 ; Heidari Someeh S1, 4 ; Hosseiniasl H1, 4 ; Saghab Torbati M5 ; Aghajani R1, 4 ; Ghorbani ZM1, 4 ; Menbarioskouie I3 ; Aghajani F1 ; Mirzamohamadi A1, 4 ; Ghafouri M3 ; Faghani S6, 7 ; Memari AH1
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, District 6, Gisha Bridge, Jalal-e-Al-e-Ahmad Hwy, No. 7, PO, Tehran, 14395578, Iran
  2. 2. Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO:, Tehran, 1419733141, Iran
  3. 3. Sports Medicine Research Center, Neuroscience Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO, Tehran, 14395578, Iran
  4. 4. Students’ Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO:, Tehran, 1417755331, Iran
  5. 5. Islamic Azad University of Zahedan, PO:, Zahedan, 9816743545, Iran
  6. 6. Shariati Hospital, Department of Radiology, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO:, Tehran, 1411713135, Iran
  7. 7. Interdisciplinary Neuroscience Research Program (INRP), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, PO: 1416634793, Tehran, Iran

Source: Reviews in the Neurosciences Published:2024


Abstract

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) represents a panel of conditions that begin during the developmental period and result in impairments of personal, social, academic, or occupational functioning. Early diagnosis is directly related to a better prognosis. Unfortunately, the diagnosis of ASD requires a long and exhausting subjective process. We aimed to review the state of the art for automated autism diagnosis and recognition in this research. In February 2022, we searched multiple databases and sources of gray literature for eligible studies. We used an adapted version of the QUADAS-2 tool to assess the risk of bias in the studies. A brief report of the methods and results of each study is presented. Data were synthesized for each modality separately using the Split Component Synthesis (SCS) method. We assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistics and evaluated publication bias using trim and fill tests combined with ln DOR. Confidence in cumulative evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach for diagnostic studies. We included 344 studies from 186,020 participants (51,129 are estimated to be unique) for nine different modalities in this review, from which 232 reported sufficient data for meta-analysis. The area under the curve was in the range of 0.71–0.90 for all the modalities. The studies on EEG data provided the best accuracy, with the area under the curve ranging between 0.85 and 0.93. We found that the literature is rife with bias and methodological/reporting flaws. Recommendations are provided for future research to provide better studies and fill in the current knowledge gaps. © 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH. All rights reserved.
Experts (# of related papers)
Other Related Docs
30. Herbal Medicines for Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2015)