Early measurement of autism risk constructs in the general population: A new factor structure of the First Years Inventory (FYIv3.1) for ages 6-16 months.
Grace T Baranek, John Sideris, Yun-Ju Chen and 3 others
PMID 35243807WHAT IT FOUND
The revised First Years Inventory breaks down into seven distinct risk domains for infants aged 6 to 16 months.
Non-social markers like sensory regulation and motor skills significantly distinguished children with later autism diagnoses from those with other developmental delays.
Key findings
01Factor analysis identified a seven-factor structure covering social communication, sensory-regulatory functions, and motor development.
02Children with later autism diagnoses scored significantly higher on all seven factors compared to those with other developmental concerns, except for the Communication, Imitation and Play factor.
03Sensory and motor factors successfully discriminated between autism, other developmental delays, and typical development, suggesting high specificity.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The response rate was only 17%, raising concerns about whether the sample represents the general population. Spanish-speaking families were excluded because the measure had not been translated, limiting generalizability. The community sample yielded a relatively small number of children with autism outcomes, which may affect the precision of the risk estimates for this specific group. The split-form design resulted in missing data, which required statistical adjustments that might introduce bias. The study relies on parent reports and online surveys rather than direct clinical observation or gold-standard diagnostic tools for the outcome classification.
Declared interests
The study was funded by Autism Speaks.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the seven-factor structure as a diagnostic tool. The study validated the underlying constructs and showed group differences, but it did not establish the specific scoring algorithms or cut-points needed for clinical diagnosis or screening in practice.