NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Direct linkDirect link
ERIC Number: EJ1000592
Record Type: Journal
Publication Date: 2013-May
Pages: 7
Abstractor: As Provided
Reference Count: 22
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: ISSN-0162-3257
Brief Report: Comparability of DSM-IV and DSM-5 ASD Research Samples
Mazefsky, C. A.; McPartland, J. C.; Gastgeb, H. Z.; Minshew, N. J.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, v43 n5 p1236-1242 May 2013
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.
Springer. 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-348-4505; e-mail: service-ny@springer.com; Web site: http://www.springerlink.com
Publication Type: Journal Articles; Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Identifiers - Assessments and Surveys: Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule