Using the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised and the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic for the Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorders in a Greek Sample with a Wide Range of Intellectual Abilities

Department of Child Psychiatry Agia Sofia Children's Hospital, University of Athens, Goudi, 11527, Athens, Greece.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.06). 09/2008; 39(3):414-20. DOI: 10.1007/s10803-008-0639-6
Source: PubMed


We studied the interrelationship between the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G), the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) and DSM-IV clinical diagnosis, in a Greek sample of 77 children and adolescents, referred for the assessment of a possible pervasive developmental disorder (PDD) and presenting a wide range of cognitive abilities. The agreement of the ADOS-G and the ADI-R with the clinical diagnosis was estimated as satisfactory and moderate, respectively, while both instruments presented with excellent sensitivity for the diagnosis of autistic disorder along with satisfactory specificity. ADOS-G/ADI-R agreement was estimated as fair. Our results confirm the discriminant validity of ADI-R and ADOS-G in diagnosing pervasive developmental disorders in children and adolescents with a wide range of intellectual abilities.

1 Follower
102 Reads
  • Source
    • "Additionally, all participants had to show variability in their confidence judgments on the face processing task administered in this study; participants who responded with the same degree of confidence to all face stimuli were excluded from the sample. As the current literature suggests that screening instruments may be less sensitive in identifying higher-functioning participants with ASD (e.g., Eaves et al. 2006; Papanikolaou et al. 2009; Schanding et al. 2012), participants with ASD were required to meet 2 of the following 3 diagnostic criteria: C7 on the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS; Lord et al. 2002), C13 on the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ; Rutter et al. 2003), and C13 on the Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ; Ehlers et al. 1999). Participants with typical development were excluded from the sample if they met any of these cutoff scores. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Higher-functioning participants with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) viewed a series of face stimuli, made decisions regarding the affect of each face, and indicated their confidence in each decision. Confidence significantly predicted accuracy across all participants, but this relation was stronger for participants with typical development than participants with ASD. In the hierarchical linear modeling analysis, there were no differences in face processing accuracy between participants with and without ASD, but participants with ASD were more confident in their decisions. These results suggest that individuals with ASD have metacognitive impairments and are overconfident in face processing. Additionally, greater metacognitive awareness was predictive of better face processing accuracy, suggesting that metacognition may be a pivotal skill to teach in interventions.
    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 10/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10803-015-2630-3 · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The most recent edition, the ADOS-2 (Lord et al. 2012) includes five modules suited for individuals with different developmental and language levels. It is a reliable and valid instrument to assess the presence of ASD in children (de Bildt et al. 2004; Gray et al. 2008; Lord et al. 2000; Papanikolaou et al. 2009), though Module 4, developed for adolescents and adults with fluent language, has received less psychometric evaluation. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent updates have been proposed to the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-2 Module 4 diagnostic algorithm. This new algorithm, however, has not yet been validated in an independent sample without intellectual disability (ID). This multi-site study compared the original and revised algorithms in individuals with ASD without ID. The revised algorithm demonstrated increased sensitivity, but lower specificity in the overall sample. Estimates were highest for females, individuals with a verbal IQ below 85 or above 115, and ages 16 and older. Best practice diagnostic procedures should include the Module 4 in conjunction with other assessment tools. Balancing needs for sensitivity and specificity depending on the purpose of assessment (e.g., clinical vs. research) and demographic characteristics mentioned above will enhance its utility.
    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 09/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10803-015-2586-3 · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Diagnostic assessments have been conducted using standardised instruments: ADOS (Li, Zhong, Cai, Chen, & Zhou, 2005) and the ADI-R (Le-Couteur et al., 1989; Lord, Rutter, & Le Couteur, 1994; Rutter et al., 2003). The combined use of the ADOS and the ADI-R has been widely adopted in both research and clinical settings (Papanikolaou et al., 2009), although its limitations are acknowledged (e.g., it is better at detecting classic autism than Asperger Syndrome, especially in adulthood). The Chinese versions of both instruments were provided by the publisher (World Psychological Service, WPS). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A Mandarin Chinese version of the Childhood Autism Spectrum Test (CAST) and Clancy Autism Behaviour Scale (CABS) were applied to 150 children aged 4-11 years old from clinical settings and mainstream schools in Beijing. All the children were further assessed using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) and the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R). The validity of two instruments on screening of ASC was examined and compared using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The validity of CAST (sensitivity: 89%, specificity: 80%, PPV: 70%) was better than the CABS (sensitivity: 58%, specificity: 84%, PPV: 65%). The area under the curve (AUC) of the CAST (AUC=0.90) was significantly higher than the CABS (AUC=0.79, p=0.0002). The Mandarin CAST demonstrated a better validity in distinguishing children with ASC from children without ASC. It is an acceptable candidate as a screening instrument for ASC in large epidemiological study in Chinese population.
    Research in developmental disabilities 04/2014; 35(7):1599-1608. DOI:10.1016/j.ridd.2014.02.005 · 4.41 Impact Factor
Show more