| Title |
Brief Report: DSM-5 “Levels of Support:” A Comment on Discrepant Conceptualizations of Severity in ASD
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10803-013-1882-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amy S. Weitlauf, Katherine O. Gotham, Alison C. Vehorn, Zachary E. Warren |
| Abstract |
Proposed DSM-5 revisions to the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) include a "severity" marker based on degree of impairment. Although qualitative differences between support levels are described, quantitative methods or practice recommendations for differentiating between levels remain undetermined. This leaves the field vulnerable to potential discrepancies between severity categorizations that may have inadvertent service implications. We examined overlap between mild, moderate, and severe impairment classifications based on autism symptoms, cognitive skills, and adaptive functioning in 726 participants (15 months-17 years) with ASD. Participants with mild, moderate, and severe autism symptoms demonstrated varying levels of adaptive and cognitive impairment. These discrepancies highlight the need for a clearly elucidated method of classifying level of support in ASD diagnosis. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 11% |
| Cambodia | 1 | 5% |
| Belgium | 1 | 5% |
| Brazil | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Ukraine | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 47% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 84% |
| Scientists | 3 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 208 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 8% |
| Researcher | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 13% |
| Unknown | 71 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 49 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 33 | 16% |
| Unknown | 77 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 03 December 2023.
All research outputs
#1,589,197
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#617
of 5,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,156
of 208,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#11
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% 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 done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 208,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.