Application of DSM-5 Criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder to Three Samples of Children With DSM-IV Diagnoses of Pervasive Developmental Disorders
ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE Substantial revisions to the DSM-IV criteria for autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) have been proposed in efforts to increase diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. This study evaluated the proposed DSM-5 criteria for the single diagnostic category of autism spectrum disorder in children with DSM-IV diagnoses of pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) and non-PDD diagnoses. METHOD Three data sets included 4,453 children with DSM-IV clinical PDD diagnoses and 690 with non-PDD diagnoses (e.g., language disorder). Items from a parent report measure of ASD symptoms (Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised) and clinical observation instrument (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule) were matched to DSM-5 criteria and used to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the proposed DSM-5 criteria and current DSM-IV criteria when compared with clinical diagnoses. RESULTS Based on just parent data, the proposed DSM-5 criteria identified 91% of children with clinical DSM-IV PDD diagnoses. Sensitivity remained high in specific subgroups, including girls and children under 4. The specificity of DSM-5 ASD was 0.53 overall, while the specificity of DSM-IV ranged from 0.24, for clinically diagnosed PDD not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), to 0.53, for autistic disorder. When data were required from both parent and clinical observation, the specificity of the DSM-5 criteria increased to 0.63. CONCLUSIONS These results suggest that most children with DSM-IV PDD diagnoses would remain eligible for an ASD diagnosis under the proposed DSM-5 criteria. Compared with the DSM-IV criteria for Asperger's disorder and PDD-NOS, the DSM-5 ASD criteria have greater specificity, particularly when abnormalities are evident from both parents and clinical observation.
SourceAvailable from: Izabela Chojnicka[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In the new classification of American Psychiatric Association – DSM-5 – a category of autistic spectrum disorders (ASD) was introduced, which replaced autistic disorder, As- perger syndrome, childhood disintegrative disorder and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified. ASD are defined by two basic psychopathological dimensions: communication disturbances and stereotyped behaviors, and the diagnosis is complemented with the assessment of language development and intellectual level. In successive epidemio- logical studies conducted in 21 century the prevalence of ASD has been rising, and currently is estimated at 1% in general population. The lifetime psychiatric comorbidity is observed in majority of patients. The most common coexisting diagnoses comprise disorders of anxi- ety affective spectrum, and in about 1/3 of patients attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorders could be diagnosed. Prodromal symptoms of ASD may emerge before 12 months of life, however reliability of diagnosis at such an early age is poor. Several screening instruments, based on the parental and/or healthcare professional assessments may be helpful in ASD detection. However, structured interviews and observation schedules remain the gold standard of diagnosis.Psychiatria polska 01/2014; 48(4):653-65. · 0.75 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This article provides a selective review of advances in scientific knowledge about autism spectrum disorder (ASD), using DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition) diagnostic criteria as a framework for the discussion. We review literature that prompted changes to the organization of ASD symptoms and diagnostic subtypes in DSM-IV, and we examine the rationale for new DSM-5 specifiers, modifiers, and severity ratings as well as the introduction of the diagnosis of social (pragmatic) communication disorder. Our goal is to summarize and critically consider the contribution of clinical psychology research, along with that of other disciplines, to the current conceptualization of ASD. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology Volume 11 is March 28, 2015. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/catalog/pubdates.aspx for revised estimates.Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 01/2015; 11(1). DOI:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032814-112745 · 12.42 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder in children. The clinical spectrum of ASD includes autism, childhood disintegrative disorder Asperger syndrome and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). Although the DSM-IVcriteria are well acceptedforASD diagnosis, there are some known limitations for clinicians. The most important issue is lack'ofspecific age-appropriate items in each domain. Thus, the DSM-IVneeds some modifications in order to be appropriate for clinical use. To develop a structured interview for children based on the DSM-IVdiagnostic criteria ofautism and PDD-NOS. MATERIAL ANDMETHOD: From June 2006 to December 2008, 140 Thai children, 121 boys and 19 girls, already diagnosed with ASD, were recruited through the child development clinics of Ramathibodi and Thammasat University Hospitals in Thailand. A 26-item structured interview was developed with scoring according to the DSM-IVdiagnostic criteria for autism andPDD- NOS. To test the accuracy of the structured interview and its reliability, 32 children with ASD were selected and interviewed by four clinicians using the new instrument. One clinician interviewed the parents or caregivers, while three others independently took notes and observed the play behavior of the children. All items from the structured interview as scored by each clinician were compared using inter-rater agreement statistics (Kappa). All of the original 140 patients were then clinically diagnosed again using the structured interview and the results were compared with the initial diagnoses. Ofthe 140patients originally diagnosed with ASD, 110 and 30patients were finally diagnosed with the new interview as having autism and PDD-NOS, respectively. The initial diagnoses from 15 cases (10.7%) were changed according to the structured interview Inter-rater reliability among the four clinicians showed a good level ofagreement (Kappa = 0.897) with statistical significance (p<0.001). The authors only compared the items in the structured interview between the autism and PDD-NOSgroups from 105 cases aged 2-5 years (79 cases with autism and 26 cases with PDD-NOS) because there were only 4 cases with PDD-NOS in the other age groups. Highly significant differences (p<0.001) in clinical items between patients with autism and patients with PDD-NOS from the final diagnoses were noted in 6 of 8 items in the category of restricted, repetitive and stereotyped patterns ofbehavior, interests and activities, which were more common in the autism group than the PDD-NOS group. In addition, the autism group had higher frequencies of using finger-pointing to indicate interest rather than verbalization, and idiosyncratic language, than the PDD-NOS group. The newly developed structured interview for Thai children with ASD had a high level ofinterrater reliability between four clinicians. However, most children tested using this structured interview were 2-5years ofage, and the study did not include non-autistic groups. The application ofthis structured interview needs further study with a wider variety ofcases, such as ASD cases from different age groups, children with delayed development and normal children.