Cited by 392Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesSchizophrenia research and treatment

Validation of Proposed DSM-5 Criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder

Open access
Frazier, Thomas W., Youngstrom, Eric A., Speer, Leslie, Embacher, Rebecca, Law, Paul, Constantino, John, Findling, Robert L., Hardan, Antonio Y. +1 more·2012·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate the validity of proposed DSM-5 criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Method We analyzed symptoms from 14,744 siblings (8,911 ASD; 5,863 non-ASD) included in a national registry, the Interactive Autism Network. Youth aged 2–18 were included if at least one child in the family was diagnosed with ASD. Caregivers reported symptoms using the Social Responsiveness Scale and the Social Communication Questionnaire. The structure of autism symptoms was examined using latent variable models that included categories, dimensions, or hybrid models specifying categories and sub-dimensions. Diagnostic efficiency statistics evaluated the proposed DSM-5 algorithm in identifying ASD. Results A hybrid model that included both a category (ASD vs. non-ASD) and two symptom dimensions (social communication/interaction and restricted/repetitive behaviors) was more parsimonious than all other models and replicated across measures and sub-samples. Empirical classifications from this hybrid model closely mirrored clinical ASD diagnoses (90% overlap), implying a broad ASD category distinct from non-ASD. DSM-5 criteria had superior specificity relative to DSM-IV-TR criteria (.97 vs. .86), however sensitivity was lower (.81 vs. .95). Relaxing DSM-5 criteria by requiring one less symptom criterion increased sensitivity (.93 vs. .81), with minimal reduction in specificity (.95 vs. .97). Conclusions Results supported the validity of proposed DSM-5 criteria for ASD as provided in Phase I field trials criteria. Increased specificity of DSM-5 relative to DSM-IV-TR may reduce false positive diagnoses, a particularly relevant consideration for low base rate clinical settings. Phase II testing of DSM-5 should consider a relaxed algorithm, without which as many as 12% of ASD-affected individuals, particularly females, will be missed. Relaxed DSM-5 criteria may improve identification of ASD, decreasing societal costs through appropriate early diagnosis and maximizing intervention resources.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaac.2011.09.021

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The updated factor structure of symptomatology, compared to the previous three-domain model, resulted in increased sensitivity with minimal reduction in specificity.

    “The updated factor structure of symptomatology, compared to the previous three-domain model, resulted in increased sensitivity with minimal reduction in specificity (Frazier et al. 2012).”

    From The Diagnosis of Autism: From Kanner to DSM-III to DSM-5 and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as Frazier et al. 2012

    The Results (DSM-IV-TR vs. DSM-5, Aim 2) report the opposite comparison: proposed DSM-5 criteria had lower sensitivity and higher specificity than DSM-IV-TR criteria. The increase in sensitivity with minimal loss of specificity applied to relaxing the DSM-5 symptom requirement, not to replacing the previous three-domain model. (LLM, conf=0.92)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The SRS-2A quantifies severity of autistic characteristics and can be used to monitor symptoms throughout the life span.

    “The measure quantifies severity of autistic characteristics and can be used to monitor symptoms throughout the life span (Frazier et al. 2012).”

    From Towards a Treatment for Intolerance of Uncertainty for Autistic Adults: A Single Case Experimental Design Study. (2018) · cites this paper as Frazier et al. 2012

    The Method > Measures section says the SRS quantitatively assesses the severity of autism traits. It does not identify the measure as the SRS-2A or say it can monitor symptoms throughout the life span; Results > Sample Characteristics describes SRS data from youth, not a lifespan sample. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • An investigation of large datasets that included multiple questions about behavior indicated that few children with any former PDD diagnosis (including PDD-NOS) would fail to meet ASD criteria.

    “An investigation of large datasets that included multiple questions about behavior, such as the ADI-R or the Social Responsiveness Scale (Constantino & Gruber 2005), indicated that few children with any former PDD diagnosis (including PDD-NOS) would fail to meet ASD criteria (Frazier et al. 2012, Huerta et al. 2012).”

    From Recent Advances in Autism Research as Reflected in DSM-5 Criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder (2015) · cites this paper as Frazier et al. 2012

    The Sample Characteristics results describe a large dataset with SRS and SCQ symptom data, and the DSM-IV-TR vs. DSM-5 results report that the proposed criteria identified many ASD cases. But the paper says DSM-5 sensitivity was lower than DSM-IV-TR sensitivity and that relaxing the DSM-5 criteria would capture an additional 11–12% of ASD cases. It does not establish that few children across every former diagnosis, including PDD-NOS, would fail to meet the proposed criteria. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • There have been very few studies that have looked at the concordance between the diagnostic criteria for ASD.

    “there have been very few studies [21][22][23] which have looked at the concordance between the criteria.”
  • Retrospective analyses of large ASD data repositories indicate that the majority of individuals with DSM-IV PDD will continue to meet criteria for ASD under DSM-5.

    “Retrospective analyses of large ASD data repositories indicate that the majority of individuals with DSM-IV PDD will continue to meet criteria for ASD under DSM-5, but prospective studies are needed to understand how diagnoses of ASD and social (pragmatic) communication disorder, as well as new ASD specifiers, modifiers, and severity ratings, will function in practice.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Frazier, T. W., Youngstrom, E. A., Speer, L., Embacher, R., Law, P., Constantino, J., Findling, R. L., Hardan, A. Y., & Eng, C.
Affiliations
  • Cleveland Clinic (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Kennedy Krieger Institute (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Frazier, Thomas W.
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
51
Issue
1
Pages
28-40.e3
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171533657
Cited by
392
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 52 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 30
FWCI
22.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5kl2rr024990-05)
  • National Center for Research Resources (KL2-RR-024990, UL1RR024989)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD42541, R01HD042541)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, DSM-5 diagnostic criteria, diagnostic validity, diagnostic algorithm, restricted and repetitive behaviors, false-positive diagnosis, siblings of autistic individuals, Social Responsiveness Scale, Social Communication Questionnaire, latent variable models
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child Development Disorders, Pervasive, Child, Preschool, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Registries, Sensitivity and Specificity, United States, Clinical Trials, Phase I as Topic, Siblings, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review