TABLE 7.

Performance of M-CHAT and M-CHAT/F Screens Predicting ASD or Suspected ASD Diagnosis and/or Developmental Delay Diagnosis

Variable	Na	Ratio (95% CI)	z Test, P	TOST
				z1 P	z2 P
PPVb			.01	.74	<.001
M-CHAT	98	0.77 (0.68–0.85)
PCP M-CHAT/F	98	0.90 (0.84–0.96)
PPVc			.90	.01	.008
PCP M-CHAT/F	98	0.90 (0.84–0.96)
AC M-CHAT/F	97	0.89 (0.83–0.96)
Sensitivityc			.77	.13	.05
PCP M-CHAT/F	98	0.48 (0.38–0.58)
AC M-CHAT/F	97	0.46 (0.36–0.56)
Specificityc			.99	.03	.03
PCP M-CHAT/F	98	0.83 (0.75–0.90)
AC M-CHAT/F	97	0.83 (0.75–0.90)
Accuracyc			.84	.12	.05
PCP M-CHAT/F	98	0.56 (0.46–0.66)
AC M-CHAT/F	97	0.55 (0.45–0.65)

Predictions include suspected ASD/new phenotype. Developmental Delay Positive was defined as >1.5 SDs below the mean on ≥2 Mullen scales or >2 SDs below the mean on ≥1 Mullen scale. Comparisons were made with 2-tailed z test and TOST, Δ = 0.1 unit of proportion. Only patients with a positive screen on the M-CHAT are included in this sample. CI, confidence interval.

^aOne patient did not have a complete AC M-CHAT/F (Fig 1).

^bTrivial difference.

^cEquivalence.