4.5 Article

Brief Report: Comparability of DSM-IV and DSM-5 ASD Research Samples

Journal

JOURNAL OF AUTISM AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS
Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages 1236-1242

Publisher

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)

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [HD35469, HD055748, U19 HD035469, P50 HD055748, P01 HD035469, K23 HD060601] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [MH086785, K23 MH086785] Funding Source: Medline
  3. 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

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available