Billets de Michelle Dawson

Billet publié sur Twitter/X le 07/04/2012 00:24

Twitter/X Publication avec DOI crossref Extrait cité dans le billet Lien intégré au billet Termes sur l’autisme

Liens cités structurés

1 ressource citée

Publication avec DOI Récupéré Publication crossref

Catherine Lord, Rebecca M. Jones (2012). Annual Research Review: Re‐thinking the classification of autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 53(5), 490-509. Wiley.

Date de publication
04/04/2012
Identifiant
10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02547.x
Auteurs
Catherine Lord, Rebecca M. Jones
Source
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Détails
53(5), 490-509
Type de référence
article
Éditeur
Wiley
Source de métadonnées
crossref

Résumé

Background: The nosology of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is at a critical point in history as the field seeks to better define dimensions of social‐communication deficits and restricted/repetitive behaviors on an individual level for both clinical and neurobiological purposes. These different dimensions also suggest an increasing need for quantitative measures that accurately map their differences, independent of developmental factors such as age, language level and IQ. Method: Psychometric measures, clinical observation as well as genetic, neurobiological and physiological research from toddlers, children and adults with ASD are reviewed. Results: The question of how to conceptualize ASDs along dimensions versus categories is discussed within the nosology of autism and the proposed changes to the DSM‐5 and ICD‐11. Differences across development are incorporated into the new classification frameworks. Conclusions: It is crucial to balance the needs of clinical practice in ASD diagnostic systems, with neurobiologically based theories that address the associations between social‐communication and restricted/repetitive dimensions in individuals. Clarifying terminology, improving description of the core features of ASD and other dimensions that interact with them and providing more valid and reliable ways to quantify them, both for research and clinical purposes, will move forward both practice and science.

Auteur·ices de l’étude dans cette référence citée