Severity of Autism Spectrum Disorders: Current Conceptualization, and Transition to DSM-5

Mehling, Margaret H.; Tassé, Marc J.

doi:10.1007/s10803-016-2731-7

Cited by 66 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An individual must manifest impairments in both social communication and restricted and repetitive behavior to be diagnosed with ASD. Given this change in the DSM‐V, researchers have begun to explore whether the factor structure of existing measures aligns with the revised diagnostic criteria for ASD [e.g., Mehling & Tassé, for a review]. In a factor analytic study of the SRS based on data from both children and adults, Frazier Ratliff, et al [] and Frazier, Youngstrom, et al [] found that a two factor model (i.e., social communication and interaction, “SRS‐SCI,” and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, “SRS‐RRB”), consistent with the new diagnostic criteria, provided a good fit to the data and better incremental validity than the conventional use of SRS total score.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validating the social responsiveness scale for adults with autism

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lay Abstract A diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder currently requires an individual to have symptoms in two core areas, i.e., difficulties in social communication, and a restricted, repetitive pattern of behavior and interests. A screening tool for autism should reflect these two diagnostic criteria in order to provide a valid way for assessing behaviors related to autism. However, since most autism measurement tools were developed for use with children and adolescents, we do not know as much about the applicability of the measurement tools to adults. The present study evaluated the validity of a commonly used measure for autism symptom severity (i.e., Social Responsiveness Scale, SRS). We examined the relationships between the SRS factors (which were consistent with two core symptom areas) and other measures related to autism in adulthood, using data from 237 adults with autism spectrum disorders. Findings showed that the SRS factors were predictive of autism symptoms and behavioral measures. Results also demonstrated that SRS factors were differentially related to measures specific to social or behavioral domains. These results highlighted the importance of taking the two core symptoms into account at the same time to enhance our understanding of autism symptomatology in adulthood. Scientific Abstract The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS; Constantino & Gruber, 2005) is a widely-used measure of autism symptoms, but its application for the study of adults with autism spectrum disorders has not been fully evaluated. Using a factor structure consistent with DSM-V criteria for autism spectrum disorder (Frazier et al., 2014), the primary purpose of the current study was to establish the validity of the SRS with a sample of adults with autism spectrum disorder (N = 237). Correlational analyses indicated that SRS factors were highly associated with autism symptoms and behavioral measures, indicating concurrent and predictive validity. Multiple regression results demonstrated that SRS factors were differentially related to measures specific to social or behavioral domains, indicating convergent and discriminant validity. Implications for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validating the social responsiveness scale for adults with autism

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is worth remembering that social impairment goes beyond anxiety and is a characteristic symptom of several neuropsychiatric conditions such as autism spectrum disorders, schizophrenia, and stress-adjustment disorders [24][25][26][27][28]. Such disorders present either a possible etiology associated with stress or present aggravated symptoms in situations of exposure to adverse situations [29][30][31].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of CRF receptor 1 antagonism in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis of male rats after intermittent social defeat stress

Vasconcelos

Stein

Gallas‐Lopes

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We recently demonstrated that the experience of brief episodes of social defeat caused impairments in social behaviors. Moreover, we provided evidence that the antagonism of corticotropin-releasing factor binding protein (CRFBP) in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST) restored social approach in stressed animals. This study aimed to test the relation between corticotropin-releasing factor receptor type 1 (CRFR1) located in the BNST and the establishment of social stress-disrupted behaviors in rats submitted to social defeat in the resident-intruder paradigm. Animals were tested for sweet solution preference, subjected to the elevated-plus maze (EPM), and to the social interaction three-chamber test. Social behavior was tested after BNST drug infusions. The drug used in this study was a CRF receptor 1 antagonist, CP376395 (CP), administered in two doses: 50 ng/0.20 μL/side, and 500 ng/0.20 μL/side. Saline solution was used as vehicle and administered 0.20 μL/side. Socially stressed animals (n = 11) did not differ compared to control animals (n = 11) in the EPM. Stressed animals displayed impaired social behavior, represented by a decrease in time spent in the interaction zone. The lower dose (CP 50 ng/0.20 μL/side) administered intra-BNST restored social behaviors in stressed animals. On the other hand, the higher dose of the CRFR1 antagonist (CP 500 ng/0.20 μL/side) induced social avoidance in rats without a history of agonistic confrontations. These findings implicate BNST CRFR1 signaling in the modulation of social behaviors in rats given the choice to explore an unfamiliar conspecific.

show abstract

“…Indeed, the National Insurance Disability Scheme in Australia, enacted since the completion of the DSM-5, interprets the lowest support level ("Requiring support") as usually disqualifying autistic people from eligibility for services (https:// www.ndis.gov.au/). Fortunately, academic studies suggest the "need for support" framing has shifted some attention toward disability (low adaptive functioning) as well as non-specific disability characteristics sometimes associated with autism such as low cognitive ability [31,32], without a consistent relationship between these developmental domains and core autism "symptoms" [33]. This is a good thing, as we have always believed that the focus of service provision should be on improving adaptive functioning and other personcentered goals, rather than trying to "correct" or "cure" autistic traits.…”

Section: Outcomes and Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lobbying Autism’s Diagnostic Revision in the DSM-5

Kapp

Ne’eman²

2019

Autistic Community and the Neurodiversity Movement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Defining the boundaries of autism has always been a complex task, shaped by a wide variety of scientific, social, political, and economic factors. Those boundaries shape the lives of autistic people, influencing not only who gets diagnosed but often providing significant and important context to clinical decisions about service provision and "treatment" along with setting the stage for lifelong diagnostic and service disparities on the basis of gender, race, class, and age.

show abstract

Severity of Autism Spectrum Disorders: Current Conceptualization, and Transition to DSM-5

Cited by 66 publications

References 102 publications

Validating the social responsiveness scale for adults with autism

Validating the social responsiveness scale for adults with autism

Role of CRF receptor 1 antagonism in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis of male rats after intermittent social defeat stress

Lobbying Autism’s Diagnostic Revision in the DSM-5

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About