Factor structure of the VABS-3 Comprehensive Parent/Caregiver form in autistic individuals: Poor fit of three-factor and unidimensional models.
Ellen Wilkinson, Cristan Farmer, Evan Kleiman and 1 others
PMID 37300413WHAT IT FOUND
The VABS-3 parent questionnaire did not support its usual three adaptive behavior areas or a single overall score in autistic people.
The scores may not separate communication, daily living, and socialization as intended.
Key findings
01The intended three-area structure of the VABS-3 parent form fit poorly in the full sample and in minimally verbal and verbal groups.
02A single overall model also fit poorly in the full sample and in both language groups.
03Fit remained poor when the sample was split into age groups and language groups.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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 SPARK sample was disproportionately White males, so the results may not apply to all autistic people. The study tested only the online parent/caregiver questionnaire, not the clinician interview form. Autistic people were not included in the design of the study. The final analysis excluded adults over 29 years and extra siblings, so it does not include every SPARK participant. Caregiver forms were invalid if more than 25% of responses were estimated, but the article does not report how many forms were excluded for this reason. The planned comparison of whether the same structure held across groups was not performed because the models fit poorly.
Declared interests
The supplied metadata lists non-U.S. government and NIH extramural research support. The article text does not include an author conflict-of-interest declaration.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the VABS-3 interview form is invalid. This study tested only the online parent/caregiver questionnaire, and the authors state that results cannot be generalized to the interview form.