An international review of autism knowledge assessment measures.

Taylor et al. (2017) hunted for every autism knowledge test used around the world. They found 67 studies that used 44 different scales. They asked one question: do these scales actually measure what they claim to measure?

The team looked for psychometric evidence—numbers that show a test is reliable and valid. Only seven percent of the studies used tools with strong evidence. Almost half used tests with no evidence at all.

Most autism knowledge tests are “home-made.” Researchers create new questions, give them once, and never check if scores are stable or meaningful. Practitioners then adopt these untested tools for training and research.

The review warns that bad scales can hide real knowledge gaps or create fake ones. Either way, programs built on shaky numbers waste time and money.

McClain et al. (2019) give hope. Their new 31-item ASKSG passed reliability and validity checks in a large sample. It is one of the rare tools that meets the standards Taylor et al. (2017) say are missing.

Tde Wit et al. (2024) show the same pattern for symptom scales. Their Autism Symptom Dimensions Questionnaire has solid psychometrics, proving good tools can be built when researchers do the math.

Stevanovic et al. (2021) sound a cross-cultural alarm. They found the Childhood Autism Rating Scale does not work the same way in six countries. This is exactly the kind of evidence Taylor et al. (2017) say is missing for knowledge tests.

Before you run staff training or parent classes, check the evidence behind your knowledge quiz. If the scale lacks reliability or validity data, swap it for one like the ASKSG that has numbers you can trust. Good data drive good decisions.