Study Supports Theory That Rise In Autism Is Related To Changes In Diagnosis
Main Category: AutismArticle Date: 09 Apr 2008 - 3:00 PDT
| Patient / Public: | ![]() |
3.5 (6 votes) |
| Healthcare Prof: | ![]() |
5 (2 votes) |
| Article Opinions: | 1 posts |
Research funded by the Wellcome Trust suggests that many children diagnosed with severe language disorders in the 1980s and 1990s would today be diagnosed as having autism. The research supports the theory that the rise in the number of cases of autism may be related to changes in how it is diagnosed.
Professor Dorothy Bishop, a Wellcome Trust Principal Research Fellow at the University of Oxford, led a study which revisited 38 adults, aged between 15-31, who had been diagnosed with having developmental language disorders as children rather than being autistic. Professor Bishop and colleagues looked at whether they now met current diagnostic criteria for autistic spectrum disorders, either through reports of their childhood behaviour or on the basis of their current behaviour. The results are published this month in the journal Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology(1).
Developmental language disorders, which include specific language impairment, are diagnosed when a child has unusual difficulty in his or her grasp of the spoken language, despite normal development in other areas. This may range from a child who has very limited ability to produce or understand spoken sentences, to one who does speak in long and complex utterances, but nevertheless has problem communicating effectively because of problems in conveying a point or grasping what others mean.
Autistic spectrum disorders, which include autism and Asperger syndrome, are developmental disorders affecting how a person communicates with and relates to other people and how they make sense of the world around them.
Participants in the study were drawn from a pool of children who had participated in a series of studies of developmental language disorder conducted during the period 1986 to 2003 and about whose conditions detailed information was known. All attended special schools or classes for children with language impairments, and would have been diagnosed by educational psychologists, paediatricians or speech therapists as having developmental language disorders and none had previously been diagnosed as autistic. However, when reassessed by Professor Bishop and colleagues using current criteria, around a quarter were identified as having autistic spectrum disorder.
In recent years, the criteria for diagnosing developmental language disorders and autism have changed. This has coincided with a marked rise in the rates of diagnosis of autism. According to the Special Needs and Autism Project(2), the figure until the 1990s was widely accepted as being about 5 people per 10,000; even using the narrowest definition of autism, this rose to almost 40 in 10,000 by 2006
There are two main hypotheses to explain this rise: the "autism epidemic" hypothesis and the "diagnostic substitution" hypothesis. Whilst the former says that the rise is genuine, the latter maintains that the true prevalence of the disorder is constant but that changes in diagnostic criteria mean that more children are being diagnosed as autistic. The latter theory is supported by a UK study(3) using the General Practice Research Database, which found that the rise in autism was mirrored by a decline in frequency of language disorders, and now by Professor Bishop's study.
"Our study shows pretty direct evidence to support the theory that changes in diagnosis may contribute towards the rise in autism," says Professor Bishop. "These were children that people were saying were not autistic in the 1980s, but when we talk to their parents now about what they were like as children, it's clear that they would be classified as autistic now.
"Criteria for diagnosing autism were much more stringent in the 1980s than nowadays and a child wouldn't be classed as autistic unless he or she was very severe. Now, children are being identified who have more subtle characteristics and who could in the past easily have been missed."
However, Professor Bishop cautions against using the results to suggest that the prevalence of autism is not genuinely rising.
"We can't say that genuine cases of autism are not on the increase as the numbers in our study are very small," she says. "However, this is the only study to date where direct evidence has been found of people who would have had a different diagnosis today than they were given fifteen or twenty years ago."
###
Source:
Craig Brierley
Wellcome Trust
Visit our autism section for the latest news on this subject.
MLA
13 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/103315.php>
APA
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/103315.php.
Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.
|
Rate this article: (Hover over the stars then click to rate) |
Patient / Public: |
or |
Health Professional: |
Visitor Opinions In Chronological Order (1)
Diagnostic Substitution In 'autism'
posted by RAJ on 9 Apr 2008 at 6:31 amDiagnostic substitution and the beginning of the autism 'epidemic 'can be traced back to 1994 with the publication of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for autism, the nomenclature having been changed to Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Kanner's original definition, the core feature of what he called the 'sui generis' of infantile autism was a profound indifference to the existence of other people (autism). He described his patients as treating parents like sticks of furniture. When parents left for a few hours or a few weeks, upon returning is children seemed to be unaware and indiifferent to the parents return. In 1994 the APA dropped Kanners definition entirely from the diagnostic criteria and replaced it with the ambiguous and subjective 'Qualitative impairment in reciprocal social interaction".
There was another so-called 'autism epidemic' that involved diagnostic substitution that occured in the late 1950's less than two decades after Kanner published his defining paper in 1943.
Here is a paper that is rarely if ever referenced since it is out of date. In 1965 Kanner published a history of psychiatry's reaction to his article and complained about how diagnostic substitution was endangering the concept of what he described and how in the late 1950's 'autism' was being misdiagnosed in children to the point where 'a multitude of autistic children seemingly began appearing everywhere'.
It could be persuavely argued that none of the checklists of isolated symptoms published in DSM-IV are actually specific to autism (as defined by Kanner) and would explain why so many unrelated conditions ranging from mentally retarded Fragile X boys, hearing or vision impaired children, children who fall on the introverted scale of normal human variants of human personalities and characteristics, children with severe devopmental delays, Down's Syndrome children and even Romanian orphans who suffered severe emotional deprivation, neglect and abuse could all meet enough items on a DSM-IV (1994) checklist of isolated symptoms to qualify for an ASD diagnosis. Matson has recently stated the obvious when he wrote that what defines PDD/NOS is by what it is not - autism. The diagnostic criteria for Asperger's Syndrome is similar to the diagnostic criteria for schizoid personality disorder.
While 'lumping' all sorts of neurologically impaired populations under a single umbrella of 'Autism Spectum Disorder" does have benefical effects, eg opening the door to special education services for children long neglected, the consequences for scientific research has been severly compromised since no one can accurately state, who are the subjects that are part of the research and what specifically are the diagnostic features of the patient populations under study.
Kanner would not recognize how his clear, core defining feature of 'infantile autism' has evolved over subsequent editions of the APA's DSM manuals for criteria for 'autism'.
Here is Kanner's 1965 article:
http://neurodiversity.com/library_kanner_1965.html
Add Your Opinion
Please note that we publish your name, but we do not publish your email address. It is only used to let you know when your message is published. We do not use it for any other purpose. Please see our privacy policy for more information.
If you write about specific medications or operations, please do not name health care professionals by name.
All opinions are moderated before being included (to stop spam)
Contact Our News Editors
For any corrections of factual information, or to contact the editors please use our feedback form.
![]()
Please send any medical news or health news press releases to:
Note: Any medical information published on this website is not intended as a substitute for informed medical advice and you should not take any action before consulting with a health care professional. For more information, please read our terms and conditions.





