Suppr超能文献

探索未另作说明的广泛性发育障碍的边界:对来自《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第四版》自闭症障碍现场试验数据的分析

Exploring the boundaries of pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified: analyses of data from the DSM-IV Autistic Disorder Field Trial.

作者信息

Buitelaar J K, Van der Gaag R, Klin A, Volkmar F

机构信息

Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neurosciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Autism Dev Disord. 1999 Feb;29(1):33-43. doi: 10.1023/a:1025966532041.

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the boundaries between PDD and related disorders and to develop classificatory algorithms for what is currently called Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDDNOS). Data collected by means of a standard coding system for the DSM-IV field trial for autistic disorder were used. Information on diagnostic criteria for autistic disorder as listed in ICD-10 and DSM-IV was compared between subjects functioning at least in the mildly retarded range and clinically classified as autistic disorder (n = 205), PDDNOS (n = 80) and other non-PDD disorders (n = 174). Only a limited number of items from the ICD-10 and DSM-IV systems for autistic disorder significantly discriminated the PDDNOS group from other disorders. A scoring rule based on a short set of 7 ICD-10/DSM-IV criteria with a cutoff of 3 items and 1 social interaction item set as mandatory had the best balance between high sensitivity and high specificity in discriminating PDDNOS from non-PDD disorders. These rules yielded a somewhat better prediction than most effective rules based on the full set of 12 criteria for autistic disorder with a cutoff of 4 items and 1 social item as mandatory. Generally accepted and well-validated criteria to identify individuals with PDDNOS should facilitate both research and clinical services.

摘要

本研究旨在探索广泛性发育障碍(PDD)与相关障碍之间的界限,并为目前所称的未特定型广泛性发育障碍(PDDNOS)开发分类算法。使用了通过自闭症障碍DSM-IV现场试验的标准编码系统收集的数据。对国际疾病分类第10版(ICD-10)和DSM-IV中列出的自闭症障碍诊断标准信息,在至少处于轻度智力迟钝范围且临床分类为自闭症障碍(n = 205)、PDDNOS(n = 80)和其他非PDD障碍(n = 174)的受试者之间进行了比较。ICD-10和DSM-IV系统中关于自闭症障碍的项目,只有少数能显著区分PDDNOS组与其他障碍。基于7条简短的ICD-10/DSM-IV标准(其中3项为临界值,1项社会互动项目为必选)的评分规则,在区分PDDNOS与非PDD障碍时,在高敏感性和高特异性之间具有最佳平衡。与基于自闭症障碍全套12条标准(其中4项为临界值,1项社会项目为必选)的最有效规则相比,这些规则产生的预测效果略好。公认且经过充分验证的识别PDDNOS个体的标准应有助于研究和临床服务。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验