Main Category: Autism
Article Date: 12 Apr 2012 – 1:00 PDT
email to a friend printer friendly opinions
Getting an autism diagnosis could be more difficult in 2013 when a revised diagnostic definition goes into effect. The proposed changes may affect the proportion of individuals who qualify for a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, according to a study by Yale Child Study Center researchers published in the April issue of the Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry.
The proposed changes to the diagnostic definition will be published in the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5).”
“Given the potential implications of these findings for service eligibility, our findings offer important information for consideration by the task force finalizing DSM-5 diagnostic criteria,” said Yale Child Study Center director Fred Volkmar, M.D., who conducted the study with colleagues Brian Reichow and James McPartland.
Volkmar and his team performed an analysis of symptoms observed in 933 individuals evaluated for autism in the field trial for DSM-4. They found that about 25 percent of those diagnosed with classic autism and 75 percent of those with Asperger’s Syndrome or pervasive developmental disorder, not otherwise specified, would not meet the new criteria for autism. The study also suggests that higher-functioning individuals may be less likely to meet the new criteria than individuals with intellectual disabilities.
Volkmar cautioned that these findings reflect analyses of a single data set and that more information will be provided by upcoming field trials overseen by the APA. He stressed that it is critical to examine the impact of proposed criteria in both clinical and research settings.
“Use of such labels, particularly in the United States, can have important implications for service,” he said. “Major changes in diagnosis also pose issues for comparing results across research studies.”
Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release. Click ‘references’ tab above for source.
Visit our autism section for the latest news on this subject. Citation: Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol. 51, No. 4 (April 2012)
Yale University Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:
Yale University. “Researchers Examine Impact Of New Autism Diagnostic Criteria.” Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 12 Apr. 2012. Web.
22 Apr. 2012. APA
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
posted by Shell Tzorfas on 14 Apr 2012 at 5:02 am
1 in every twenty-nine12 year old boys in NJ now has Autism, Who are well enough to be in Public School. This was taken from the CDC findings of 1 in 49 for both sexes. These findings are FOUR years old. If they researched children from 2 through 10 the numbers would be far worse. Asperger’s kids were Barely included. Why? Because they usually do not qualify for school services and if what they have impacts their ability to learn then they likely have just plain Autism .A sudden 78% increase can NOT be Genetics.Let’s get to the Point. These kids are injured by the point of a needle that includes Aluminum, mercury, embalming fluid, ether, fetal cells-Peanuts-antifreeze and much more. So now after they have been fully injured, the medical community has the audacity to UNdiagnose and take away what minute amounts of services a few get in the first place? I do appreciate that the research in this article shows the truth, that it will be difficult for many affected kids to get help or a diagnosis leading towards help. What is the Point?
| post followup | alert a moderator |
posted by Carol Fowler on 14 Apr 2012 at 6:56 am
This reminds me of how the state of Ohio handles identification and services for other exceptional learners. Students are identifited as gifted on the basis of a 95th percentile on a norm referenced test or a group IQ score of 127 or higher. These scores are valid for 24 months. SO a student may either be identified specific academic, superior cognitive or both for a 2 yr period. While the state requires identification and parental notification;it does not mandate services for the identified child. Furthermore, when the child is retested 24 months later on a norm referenced test, the child should he not meet the required percentile or IQ score is no longer identified gifted.
Should that child reside in a district that provides services for the gifted and talented, the child would no longer qualify for those services. Hence gifted one day, not gifted the next day.
It is this educator’s opinion who is also a parent to 4 daughters, that once gifted always gifted unless a medical condition affects the brains ability to process and function at pre-condition levels.
The analogy here is that there will be children and adults who exhibit symptoms and functions that today would garner them services as an individual on the ASD, but tomorrow even though those same symptoms and functions exist, the individual would no longer qualify for services under the ASD diagnosis. Yet, there has been no change in the neurochemical functioning of the brain or any other changes to the “wiring” of the brain.
What compelling and significant studies in mumber of participants and quality of data is there that suggests it is in the individuals best interst or it is an educational best practice to create new criteria for the DSM V that will eliminate significant numbers of individuals from receiving appropriate services?
| post followup | alert a moderator |
‘Researchers Examine Impact Of New Autism Diagnostic Criteria’
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.
View the original article here