Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2025 Nov 28;56(1):443–446. doi: 10.1007/s10803-025-07138-7

Correction: Eye Tracking Screening for ASD in Nursery: Is Early Diagnosis Possible? A Large-scale Real-life Experiment

Victor Hugo da Silva 1,2,3,✉, Yasmine R Martins 1, Pedro A S O Neto 4, Joana Portolese 5,6, Fátima R Fernandes 1, Carlos Takeuchi 1, Fernanda O A Lima 1, Marcilia L Martyn 1, Katerina Lukasova 1,2,3, Edson Amaro 1,7
PMCID: PMC12860849  PMID: 41313579

Correction: Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

10.1007/s10803-025-07048-8

In this article, Figs. 4 and 5 appeared incorrectly and have now been corrected in the original publication. For completeness and transparency, the old incorrect versions and correct version are displayed below.

In addition to the above, the co-authors’ email address has been incorrectly appeared, but should have been removed and

In Table 2, the header and its values incorrectly appeared in same line, the incorrect and correct versions of Table 2 are given below.

Incorrect Fig. 4.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Mean gaze duration distribution

Correct Fig. 4.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Mean gaze duration (with standard deviation) in different areas of interest (AOIs) for typical development (TD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and nontypical development (nonTD). groups. The duration is relative to the overall child’s gaze within each trial, allowing to observe the proportion of gaze allocated to each of the AOIs. ASD statistically significant differences from the other groups are marked with (* < 0.05; TD and nTD; t test; Tukey correction)

Incorrect Fig. 5.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Mean gaze duration distribution

Correct Fig. 5.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

Mean proportion of gaze transitions (with standar deviation) for the TD, ASD and nontypical development (nTD) groups (group effects). The duration is relative to the overall child’s gaze within each trial, allowing to observe the proportion of gaze allocated to each of the AOIs. ASD statistically significant difference to other the groups is marked with (* < 0.05; ** < 0.01; TD and nTD; t test; Tukey correction)

Incorrect Table 2.

Table 2.

Demographic variables and comparisons between the experimental groups

TD = 320 (of 380) ASD = 17 (of 23) nTD = 11 ANOVA
M (SD; Min–Max) M (SD; Min–Max) M (SD; Min–Max) p value
CARS score 16 (2; 15–24) 30 (5; 25–49) 26 (2; 20–30) 0.001
Mother’s age* 27 (6; 15–46) 29 (7; 16–40) 27 (5; 20–33) 0.49
Mother’s education** 4 (0.8; 1–6) 29 (7; 16–40) 3.8 (0.8; 2–5) 0.16
ABEP score*** C1(-; DE-A) 27.8 (-; C2-B2) C1 (-; DE-A) 0.18

Correct Table 2.

Table 2.

Demographic variables and comparisons between the experimental groups

TD = 320 (of 380) ASD = 17 (of 23) nTD = 11 ANOVA
M
(SD; Min–Max)
M
(SD; Min–Max)
M
(SD; Min–Max)
p value
CARS score

16

(2; 15–24)

30

(5; 25–49)

26

(2; 20–30)

0.001
Mother’s age*

27

(6; 15–46)

29

(7; 16–40)

27

(5; 20–33)

0.49
Mother’s education**

4

(0.8; 1–6)

29

(7; 16–40)

3.8

(0.8; 2–5)

0.16
ABEP score***

C1

(–; DE-A)

27.8

(–; C2-B2)

C1

(–; DE-A)

0.18

M (median); SD (standard deviation); Min (minimum); Max (maximum); ABEP (Brazilian Association of Research in Commerce); CARS (Childhood Autism Rating Scale); SES (socioeconomic family status)

*Mother’s age (years);

**Mother’s education: basic education incomplete (1); basic education complete (2); secondary school incomplete (3); secondary school complete (4); university incomplete (5); university complete (6)

***ABEP converted into an SES referenced by the Sept/2023 rate as follows: (1) Low SES (E and D classes): 340.0 to 4440.7 (ABEP; www.abep.org)

The original article has been corrected.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


Articles from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES