The application of the first year inventory for ASD screening in Israel.

The team gave the First Year Inventory (FYI) to Israeli parents of 12-month-old babies. They wanted to see if the same cut-off scores used in the United States also flagged the right babies in Israel.

They compared scores from babies later found to be at-risk for autism with scores from babies who were not at-risk. This showed whether the tool worked in a new country and language.

The FYI still separated at-risk and non-risk babies, but only after they raised the cut-off by 4.8 points. The higher threshold reduced false alarms while still catching most babies who needed follow-up.

In short, the questionnaire works in Israel, yet you must use the local cut-off, not the American one.

Rihtman et al. (2026) did the same kind of re-norming for the Hebrew LDCDQ in Israeli preschoolers. Both papers show that translated tools need fresh cut-offs even when the words stay the same.

Mukherjee et al. (2021) reviewed high-tech infant screens that track movement. Their review and the FYI study agree that early screening is possible, but the FYI gives you a low-tech, parent-friendly option today while the tech tools still need more proof.

Alcañiz et al. (2022) used VR eye-tracking plus machine learning to spot ASD in slightly older kids. Their 86% accuracy sounds impressive, yet the FYI remains easier and cheaper for 12-month-olds until that tech is ready for clinics.

If you screen babies in Israel, add 4.8 points to the US FYI cut-off before you flag a concern. The same lesson applies anywhere: always re-validate cut-offs after translation or culture shift. Until fancy tech catches up, a short parent form plus the right local threshold gives you a ready-made way to catch ASD risk before the first birthday.