Examining the Diagnostic Validity of Autism Measures Among Adults in an Outpatient Clinic Sample

Abstract

Background: Previous research has questioned the validity of diagnostic measures for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) among adults. This study examined the correspondence between several measures and clinician diagnosis. Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review for 93 adults (18-61 years; 72% male) who received an ASD evaluation at a specialty outpatient clinic. Thirty-one individuals (33%) in the sample were diagnosed with ASD. We compared participant scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ), the Ritvo Autism Asperger's Diagnostic Scale-Revised (RAADS-R), and the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) to clinician diagnosis of ASD. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) for each measure. Results: Participants diagnosed with ASD scored significantly higher, on average, on the ADOS than those who were not diagnosed with ASD, but not on the RAADS-R or AQ. The AUC was relatively low for each measure: ADOS = 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.81), RAADS-R = 0.58 (95% CI 0.46-0.72), and AQ = 0.40 (95% CI 0.28-0.52). Sensitivity and specificity of all three measures were in the poor to fair range. When dichotomized at the optimal cutoffs for this sample, the ADOS had a sensitivity of 0.65 and a specificity of 0.76; the RAADS-R had a sensitivity of 0.52 and a specificity of 0.73; and the AQ had a sensitivity of 0.45 and a specificity of 0.52. Conclusions: Results of the study suggest that clinicians should not rely solely on self-report measures or the ADOS when diagnosing adults on the spectrum. Further development of measures is needed, including selfreport measures with higher diagnostic validity, that are sensitive across age, gender, and cognitive functioning, and that differentiate autism from psychiatric diagnoses. Lay SummaryWhy was this study done?Diagnosing adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is difficult. Other research has suggested that the few measures that exist for autistic adults may not be very effective for accurate diagnoses. We wanted to see how closely the results of commonly used ASD assessment tools compared with clinical diagnoses in a real-life outpatient setting. What did the researchers do?This study looked at adults who went to an adult ASD outpatient clinic for an initial ASD diagnosis over 3 years. Of these 93 adults, one-third were diagnosed as autistic. As part of the evaluation, all participants completed two commonly used autism screening surveys-the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ) and the Ritvo Autism Asperger's Diagnostic Scale-Revised (RAADS-R)-and took part in a semistructured diagnostic interview called the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS). The clinicians also collected additional information and, when possible, spoke to family members before jointly making a diagnosis. The researchers compared how those diagnosed with ASD and those who were not diagnosed with ASD scored on the AQ, the RAADS-R, and the ADOS. What were the results of this study?Although adults on the spectrum scored higher on average on the ...

The Predictive Value of the AQ and the SRS-A in the Diagnosis of ASD in Adults in Clinical Practice

“…The respondent determines the extent to which a symptom is Sizoo et al (2015), study (clinical setting, adults suspected of ASD, ASD rate = 66%) not included here, since it does not concern AQ-50, but AQ-10 and AQ-28. Conner et al (2019) had a non-ASD groups that scored higher than the ASD group on the AQ: this finding is remarkably different from all other studies reported here ACC accuracy (correct classification), ANX NA personally applicable on a 4-point Likert-scale: 'definitely agree', 'slightly agree', 'slightly disagree', and 'definitely disagree'. All answers are dichotomized for processing.…”

The relationship of autistic traits to taste and olfactory processing in anorexia nervosa

“…The AQ was used in this current study to screen HC for clinically significant levels of autistic traits as it has shown to have good validity distinguishing cases from controls. However, recent studies suggest it may be less effective in predicting an autism diagnosis in clinical populations with high levels of suspected autistic traits [44][45][46]. In light of this research, the AQ was not used to categorise people with AN in this study as above or below threshold on the AQ, but rather was used as a continuous measure of autistic traits.…”

Interoception in Anorexia Nervosa: Exploring Associations With Alexithymia and Autistic Traits

“…The AQ has previously been used in AN populations, with people with AN typically scoring higher compared to HC (28). Whilst the AQ does include a cut-off score, with scores above 32 indicating potentially clinically significant levels of autistic traits, recent research has questioned the ability of the AQ to distinguish "true" autism cases in populations with high levels of autistic traits (51)(52)(53). Consequently, beyond screening HC for high autistic traits at the beginning of the study, the AQ was only used in the analysis as a continuous measure.…”