Skip to main content

Table 1 Status of children in GA SEEDa from invitation to enrollment

From: Assessment of demographic and perinatal predictors of non-response and impact of non-response on measures of association in a population-based case control study: findings from the Georgia Study to Explore Early Development

Presumptive study classification at time of invitationb ASD DD POP
No. invited 274 1968 2608
Final status of invited
 No. unable to contact—but indication that contact info may not have been valid (mailing returned to sender; phone number not found, disconnected, or invalid; phone call reveals phone number does not belong to desired participant) 92 696 1310
 No. unable to contact—no response to mailing or follow-up phone calls and no indication that contact information was invalid 24 179 278
 No. contacted, but child had aged out of study by time contact was made, eligibility screen not administered 3 241 170
 No. contacted, but refused eligibility screen 46 334 358
 No. contacted, but determined ineligible 18 146 266
 No. contacted, eligible, but refused participation after eligibility screen 0 55 0
 No. contacted, eligible and enrolled 91 317 226
Among those contacted, eligible and enrolled
 No. with positive ASD screen—and thus moved to presumptive ASD protocol workflowc N/Ad 139 9
 Final no. in each presumptive workflow 239 178 217
  1. aChildren born in multiple births or missing data for birth certificate analyses not included in table because they were excluded from this analysis
  2. bChildren from school and health sources were identified as potential ASD if they had a previous diagnosis of ASD or special education classification of autism; they were identified as potential DD if they had a previous diagnosis or special education classification indicating a non-ASD developmental disability or delay. Potential POP children were randomly sampled from birth certificates
  3. cAt enrollment parents of children in all groups were administered a brief ASD screen; 148 children originally identified as potential DD or potential POP had a positive score on the screen and were moved into a study work flow designated presumptive ASD. This group received a more intensive developmental assessment than other children, including administration of two autism-specific instruments
  4. dAll children identified as having a previous diagnosis of ASD remained in the presumptive ASD group (which received the full autism-specific developmental assessment) regardless of their autism screen results obtained at enrollment