↓ Skip to main content

Diagnostic procedures in autism spectrum disorders: a systematic literature review.

Overview of attention for article published in European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, January 2013
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
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.
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

Falkmer T, Anderson K, Falkmer M, Horlin C, 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 1 1%
Malaysia 1 1%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Professor 2 3%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 35 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Unspecified 4 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 35 44%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 26 April 2017.
All research outputs
#802,873
of 11,347,627 outputs
Outputs from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#69
of 943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,642
of 312,610 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,347,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 312,610 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 93% of its contemporaries.