![]() By the 1970s longitudinal and other studies strongly suggested the validity of the condition, its frequent association with intellectual disability, and its strong brain and genetic basis. Early research was confused by some false leads and a lack of clarity about the validity of autism (as compared with childhood schizophrenia). Kanner’s thoughtful clinical description noted many of the features still commonly included in diagnostic criteria for the disorder, and his emphasis on the centrality of social difficulties remains a hallmark of the condition. The condition known as autistic disorder, childhood autism, or infantile autism was first described by Kanner in his report of 11 children with what appeared to him to be a novel condition characterized by two essential features of autism a lack of interest in the social world, and a group of behaviors he referred to as ‘resistance to change’ or ‘insistence on sameness’. We begin with a short review of the history of diagnostic approaches, the rational for the DSM-5 model, and a discussion of its uses and limitations.ĭiagnosis of autism from Kanner to DSM-IV This paper reviews recent developments in the diagnosis of autism in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fifth edition (DSM-5). Other differences include issues of comorbidity, impairment requirements, and implications for service eligibility. Probably the major difference between ICD-10 and DSM-IV is the provision in ICD-10 of separate guidelines for research and clinical work while DSM-IV provides one set of guidelines for both purposes. Various interests must be balanced in designing official systems for example, reliability and ease of use, differentiation of categories, and consideration of developmental issues. ![]() Since the alignment of diagnostic criteria of DSM-IV and ICD-10, there has been an explosion of research – with well over 2,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers published last year, an increase from fewer than 2,000 peer-reviewed papers published in the decade before DSM-IV/ICD-10, highlighting the utility of such an alignment. ![]() Before autism was first recognized officially by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, third edition (DSM-III) in 1980, it was very difficult to be sure of the comparability of samples this hindered the ability to synthesize findings across studies and hampered research. Official diagnostic systems, such as the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) and the American Psychiatric Associations Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, fourth edition (DSM-IV), have usually been oriented around specific categories but have increasingly also included dimensional approaches to provide better characterization. ![]() As Rutter and Schopler noted, there is not a single, simple, right way to approach this task and, for psychiatric and developmental disorders, a range of approaches have been developed. Commonality in approaches to classification help us communicate more effectively about clinical problems (rapidly conveying a general sense of the kinds of difficulties exhibited) and conduct better research by insuring comparability of samples across sites and countries.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |