Screen to Screen Versus Face to Face: Evaluating Telehealth Autism Diagnostic Assessments for Young Children in a Diverse Clinical Setting.

The study included only 21 children, so it cannot establish how well the telehealth tool works in a larger population. Only 2 children were not diagnosed with autism, so the study gives little information about ruling out autism. The children were not randomly selected, and the sample largely had significant autism characteristics, so selection bias may affect the agreement. The ADOS-2 was not completed for all children; 2 were diagnosed without it because history and observation were clear. Parent feedback was not collected, and the autistic community was not involved in codesign. TAP cut-off scores have changed, and using a higher cut-off would have produced 2 false negatives in this small cohort. The study did not test whether the telehealth assessment alone is sufficient for diagnosis; it was compared with a full in-person multidisciplinary assessment.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest, and the funding named was the University of Sydney.

Do not read this as proof that a telehealth assessment can replace in-person autism diagnosis. The sample was small, only 2 children were not diagnosed with autism, and one child was rated autistic by telehealth but not diagnosed in person, while another was rated unsure by telehealth but diagnosed in person.