Klin Ami, Pauls David, Schultz Robert, Volkmar Fred
Yale Child Study Center, 230 South Frontage Road, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
J Autism Dev Disord. 2005 Apr;35(2):221-34. doi: 10.1007/s10803-004-2001-y.
To examine the implications for research of the use of three alternative definitions for Asperger syndrome (AS). Differences across the three nosologic systems were examined in terms of diagnostic assignment, IQ profiles, comorbid symptoms, and familial aggregation of social and other psychiatric symptoms.
Standard data on diagnosis, intellectual functioning, comorbidity patterns, and family history were obtained on 65 individuals screened for a very high probability of having autism without mental retardation (or higher functioning autism, HFA) or AS. Diagnoses of AS were established based on three different approaches: DSM-IV, presence/absence of communicative phrase speech by 3 years, and a system designed to highlight prototypical features of AS.
Agreement between the three diagnostic systems was poor. AS could be differentiated from HFA (but not from PDD-NOS) on the basis of IQ profiles in two of the three systems. Differences in patterns of comorbid symptomatology were obtained in two of the three systems, although differences were primarily driven by the PDD-NOS category. Only one of the approaches yielded differences relative to aggregation of the "broader phenotype" in family members.
Diagnostic assignments of AS based on three commonly used approaches have low agreement and lead to different results in comparisons of IQ profiles, patterns of comorbidity, and familial aggregation of psychiatric symptoms across the approach-specific resultant groups of HFA, AS, and PDD-NOS.
探讨使用阿斯伯格综合征(AS)的三种替代定义对研究的影响。从诊断分配、智商概况、共病症状以及社交和其他精神症状的家族聚集性方面,研究这三种疾病分类系统之间的差异。
获取了65名个体的标准诊断数据、智力功能数据、共病模式数据和家族史数据,这些个体经筛查极有可能患有无智力障碍的自闭症(或高功能自闭症,HFA)或AS。基于三种不同方法确立AS诊断:《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)、3岁时是否存在交流性短语言语,以及一个旨在突出AS典型特征的系统。
三种诊断系统之间的一致性较差。在三种系统中的两种里,可根据智商概况将AS与HFA区分开(但无法与未特定指明的广泛性发育障碍[PDD-NOS]区分)。在三种系统中的两种里,共病症状模式存在差异,不过差异主要由PDD-NOS类别驱动。在家庭成员“更广泛表型”的聚集方面,只有一种方法产生了差异。
基于三种常用方法对AS进行的诊断分配一致性较低,并且在针对特定方法得出的HFA、AS和PDD-NOS结果组之间,对智商概况、共病模式以及精神症状的家族聚集性进行比较时会导致不同结果。