Brief Report: Comparability of DSM-IV and DSM-5 ASD Research Samples.
Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Webster Hall, Suite 300, 3811 O’Hara Street, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA, email@example.com.
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.
Comment – It’s just not good enough.