Journal
JOURNAL OF AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS
Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages 1236-1242Publisher
SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10803-012-1665-y
Keywords
Autism; Diagnosis; Assessment; DSM-5; Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS); Autism Diagnostic Interview (ADI)
Categories
Funding
- NICHD NIH HHS [HD35469, HD055748, U19 HD035469, P50 HD055748, P01 HD035469, K23 HD060601] Funding Source: Medline
- NIMH NIH HHS [MH086785, K23 MH086785] Funding Source: Medline
- NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS033355] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5) criteria for ASD have been criticized for being too restrictive, especially for more cognitively-able individuals. It is unclear, however, if high-functioning individuals deemed eligible for research via standardized diagnostic assessments would meet DSM-5 criteria. This study investigated the impact of DSM-5 on the diagnostic status of 498 high-functioning participants with ASD research diagnoses. The percent of participants satisfying all DSM-5-requirements varied significantly with reliance on data from the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS; 33 %) versus Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R; 83 %), highlighting the impact of diagnostic methodology on ability to document DSM-5 symptoms. Utilizing combined ADOS/ADI-R data, 93 % of participants met DSM-5 criteria, which suggests likely continuity between DSM-IV and DSM-5 research samples characterized with these instruments in combination.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available