Commentary
Best practices and processes for assessment of autism spectrum disorder – the intended role of standardized diagnostic instruments
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21344527 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Somer Bishop (0000-0002-2592-4715, University of California, San Francisco, corresponding author), Somer L Bishop (Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences and Weill Institute for Neurosciences University of California, San Francisco San Francisco CA USA), Catherine Lord (0000-0001-5633-1253, Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles CA USA) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 834-838 |
| Publication date | 2023-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0021-9630 • E-ISSN: 1469-7610 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/jcpp.13802 |
| PMID | 37005008 |
| OpenAlex | W4362506987 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 7 |
| References cited | 30 |
Development of standardized diagnostic instruments has facilitated the systematic characterization of individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in clinical and research settings. However, overemphasis on scores from specific instruments has significantly detracted from the original purpose of these tools. Rather than provide a definitive “answer,” or even a confirmation of diagnosis, standardized diagnostic instruments were designed to aid clinicians in the process of gathering information about social communication, play, and repetitive and sensory behaviors relevant to diagnosis and treatment planning. Importantly, many autism diagnostic instruments are not validated for certain patient populations, including those with severe vision, hearing, motor, and/or cognitive impairments, and they cannot be administered via a translator. In addition, certain circumstances, such as the need to wear personal protective equipment (PPE), or behavioral factors (e.g., selective mutism) may interfere with standardized administration or scoring procedures, rendering scores invalid. Thus, understanding the uses and limitations of specific tools within specific clinical or research populations, as well as similarities or differences between these populations and the instrument validation samples, is paramount. Accordingly, payers and other systems must not mandate the use of specific tools in cases when their use would be inappropriate. To ensure equitable access to appropriate assessment and treatment services, it is imperative that diagnosticians be trained in best practice methods for the assessment of autism, including if, how, and when to appropriately employ standardized diagnostic instruments
Autism · Autism spectrum disorder · Best practice · Cognition · Mandate · Psychiatry · Standardized test · Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder · Autism Spectrum Disorder Research · Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues · Clinical Psychology · Psychology
Acceptability and Pilot Validation of the Diagnostic Autism Spectrum Interview (Dasi-2) Compared with Clinical and Ados-2 Outcomes
Proximity-based solutions for optimizing autism spectrum disorder treatment
Diagnostic assessment of autism in adults – current considerations in neurodevelopmentally informed professional learning with reference to Ados-2
Epidemiology with psychometric spirit
DSM ‐5 based algorithms for the Autism Diagnostic Interview‐Revised for children ages 4–17 years
The stability of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule‐2 in children aged 14–36 months with elevated likelihood for autism
Improving access to autism evaluations
| Unique citing works | 7 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,33 |
| Citation span | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 6 |