↓ Skip to main content

Exploring the Proposed DSM-5 Criteria in a Clinical Sample

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, July 2012
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
Exploring the Proposed DSM-5 Criteria in a Clinical Sample
Published in
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, July 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10803-012-1599-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Azin Taheri, Adrienne Perry

Abstract

The proposed DSM-5 criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) depart substantially from the previous DSM-IV criteria. In this file review study of 131 children aged 2-12, previously diagnosed with either Autistic Disorder or Pervasive Developmental Disorder-Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS), 63 % met the new DSM-5 ASD criteria, including 81 % previously diagnosed with Autistic Disorder and only 17 % of those with PDD-NOS. The proportion of children meeting DSM-5 differed by IQ grouping as well, with higher rates in lower IQ groups. Children who did meet criteria for ASD had significantly lower levels of cognitive and adaptive skills and greater autism severity but were similar in age. These findings raise concerns that the new DSM-5 criteria may miss a number of children who would currently receive a diagnosis.

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 %
United Kingdom 2 2%
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 97 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Other 20 19%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 42 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Social Sciences 8 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 17 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#2,101,327
of 23,867,274 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#932
of 5,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,153
of 165,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders
#16
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,867,274 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,240 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 165,848 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.