• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders >Three Diagnostic Approaches to Asperger Syndrome: Implications for Research
【24h】

Three Diagnostic Approaches to Asperger Syndrome: Implications for Research

机译：阿斯伯格综合症的三种诊断方法：对研究的意义

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Objective: To examine the implications for research of the use of three alternative definitions for Asperger syndrome (AS). Differences across the three nosologic systems were examined in terms of diagnostic assignment, IQ profiles, comorbid symptoms, and familial aggregation of social and other psychiatric symptoms. Method: Standard data on diagnosis, intellectual functioning, comorbidity patterns, and family history were obtained on 65 individuals screened for a very high probability of having autism without mental retardation (or higher functioning autism, HFA) or AS. Diagnoses of AS were established based on three different approaches: DSM-IV, presence/absence of communicative phrase speech by 3 years, and a system designed to highlight prototypical features of AS. Results: Agreement between the three diagnostic systems was poor. AS could be differentiated from HFA (but not from PDD-NOS) on the basis of IQ profiles in two of the three systems. Differences in patterns of comorbid symptomatology were obtained in two of the three systems, although differences were primarily driven by the PDD-NOS category. Only one of the approaches yielded differences relative to aggregation of the “broader phenotype” in family members. Conclusions: Diagnostic assignments of AS based on three commonly used approaches have low agreement and lead to different results in comparisons of IQ profiles, patterns of comorbidity, and familial aggregation of psychiatric symptoms across the approach-specific resultant groups of HFA, AS, and PDD-NOS.
机译：目的：探讨使用三种替代定义来治疗阿斯伯格综合症（AS）的意义。在诊断分配，智商概况，合并症，以及社会和其他精神病学症状的家族聚集方面检查了三种疾病学系统的差异。方法：从65名筛查了自闭症但没有智力障碍（或功能障碍自闭症或HFA）或AS的可能性高的人中，获得了有关诊断，智力功能，合并症模式和家族史的标准数据。 AS的诊断是基于三种不同的方法建立的：DSM-IV，3年之前是否存在交际短语语音，以及旨在突出AS原型特征的系统。结果：这三个诊断系统之间的一致性差。在三个系统中的两个系统中，可以根据IQ配置文件将AS与HFA（而非PDD-NOS）区分开。在三种系统中的两种系统中，共病症状的模式有所不同，尽管差异主要是由PDD-NOS类别引起的。相对于家庭成员“更广泛的表型”的聚集，只有一种方法产生差异。结论：基于三种常用方法的AS诊断分配在HFA，AS和PDD特定于方法的特定治疗组之间的智商概况，合并症模式和精神症状的家族聚集的比较结果不一致，并且导致不同的结果-没有

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号