An Exploration of Online and In-Person Administration of the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition (KBIT-2) in Children and Adolescents Being Evaluated for Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Online KBIT-2 is fine for autistic youth 12 and up, but kids under 12 often shift scores—re-test them in person before big choices.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Anbar et al. (2025) gave the KBIT-2 IQ test twice to kids being checked for autism. First online, then in person. They wanted to see if both scores match.
All kids were already in an ASD clinic. No extra kids were added. The team just compared the two scores each child got.
What they found
Most scores lined up, but one in four kids under 12 had a big jump or drop. Older kids stayed steady.
The shift was always more than one standard deviation. That is enough to change a placement or service.
How this fits with other research
Traetta et al. (2025) also tested autistic teens online and face-to-face. They used a pragmatics test, not IQ. Both ways gave the same scores. Together the two 2025 papers show telehealth works for teens, but Joshua adds a warning for younger kids.
Older papers like Baron-Cohen et al. (2006) and Szempruch et al. (1993) never tried remote testing. They only prove IQ and trait tools matter for autistic youth. Joshua updates that story by adding the mode question.
No clear clash exists. The new detail is age: under 12 needs a second look; 12 plus can trust the screen.
Why it matters
If you test a child under 12 for services, plan to re-check low or high KBIT-2 scores in person before you lock the file. For teens, one solid online session is enough. This saves travel time while keeping decisions safe.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a note to your telehealth intake: if the client is under 12 and the KBIT-2 score drives placement, schedule a live re-test.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
PURPOSE: Most assessment tools used to diagnose and characterize autism spectrum disorder (ASD) were developed for in-person administration. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in the need to adapt traditional assessment tools for online administration with only minimal evidence to support validity of such practices. METHODS: The current exploratory study compared scores from online administration of the Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test, Second Edition (KBIT-2) during the pandemic to scores derived from follow-up testing using traditional in-person administration. Participants were 47 children and adolescents (M age = 9.48 years, SD = 4.06; 68.10% male) who participated in a telehealth diagnostic evaluation for ASD that included online administration of the KBIT-2. Participants were invited to complete the KBIT-2 a second time during an in-person study visit. RESULTS: Pearson's correlation coefficients suggested acceptable to good reliability between online and in-person administration. Although most participants' online and in-person scores were within one standard deviation of each other, results suggested statistically significant differences between scores derived from the two modalities. Additionally, 19-26% of participants (depending on domain examined) had scores that differed by more than one standard deviation. Notably, all but one of these participants was under the age of 12 years. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that online administration of the KBIT-2 is likely appropriate for older children and adolescents with ASD. However, additional research is needed to test online administration of intellectual assessments for children with ASD.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2025 · doi:10.1037/pas0000939.supp