↓ Skip to main content

A Comparison of DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 Diagnostic Classifications in the Clinical Diagnosis of Autistic Spectrum Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
A Comparison of DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 Diagnostic Classifications in the Clinical Diagnosis of Autistic Spectrum Disorder
Published in
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, October 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10803-016-2937-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ferhat Yaylaci, Suha Miral

Abstract

Aim of this study was to compare children diagnosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) according to DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 diagnostic systems. One hundred fifty children aged between 3 and 15 years diagnosed with PDD by DSM-IV-TR were included. PDD symptoms were reviewed through psychiatric assessment based on DSM-IV-TR and DSM-5 criteria. Clinical severity was determined using Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) and Autism Behavior Checklist (ABC). A statistically significant decrease (19.3 %) was detected in the diagnostic ratio with DSM-5. Age and symptom severity differed significantly between those who were and were not diagnosed with PDD using DSM-5. B4 criteria in DSM-5 was most common criterion. Results indicate that individuals diagnosed with PDD by DSM-IV-TR criteria may not be diagnosed using DSM-5 criteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 7 7%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 33 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 36 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 June 2018.
All research outputs
#3,428,872
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#1,444
of 5,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,964
of 323,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#25
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,807 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.