You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Diagnostic procedures in autism spectrum disorders: a systematic literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00787-013-0375-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Torbjörn Falkmer, Katie Anderson, Marita Falkmer, Chiara Horlin |
| Abstract |
At present, 'gold standard' diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is a lengthy and time consuming process that requires suitably qualified multi-disciplinary team (MDT) personnel to assess behavioural, historical, and parent-report information to determine a diagnosis. A number of different tools have been developed to assist in determination. To optimise the diagnostic procedures, the best diagnostic instruments need to be identified. This study is a systematic review addressing the accuracy, reliability, validity and utility of reported diagnostic tools and assessments. To be included in this review, studies must have (1) identified an ASD diagnostic tool; (2) investigated either diagnostic procedure or the tools or personnel required; (3) be presented in English; (4) be conducted in the Western world; (5) be one of three types of studies [adapted from Samtani et al. in Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3:1-13, 2011], viz. (a) cohort studies or cross-sectional studies, (b) randomised studies of test accuracy, (c) case-control studies. MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were scrutinised for relevant literature published from 2000 inclusive on 20th January 2012. In total, 68 articles were included. 17 tools were assessed. However, many lacked an evidence base of high quality-independent studies. The Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) and Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) stood out with the largest evidence base and highest sensitivity and specificity. When the ADI-R and ADOS were used in combination they revealed levels of accuracy very similar to the correct classification rates for the current 'gold standard' diagnostic procedure viz. 80.8% for ASD. There is scope for future studies on the use of the ADI-R and ADOS in combination. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 | 7 | 39% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 17% |
| Chile | 1 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 94% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 493 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 481 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 78 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 67 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 63 | 13% |
| Researcher | 53 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 44 | 9% |
| Other | 86 | 17% |
| Unknown | 102 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 155 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 88 | 18% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 27 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 3% |
| Other | 65 | 13% |
| Unknown | 114 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 64. 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 14 January 2023.
All research outputs
#673,231
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#56
of 1,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,059
of 294,594 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#1
of 20 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 294,594 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.