Cited by 325Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues

Preliminary evidence suggesting caution in the use of psychiatric self-report measures with adolescents with high-functioning autism spectrum disorders

Open access
Mazefsky, C.A., Kao, J., Oswald, D.P.·2011·Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Abstract

This study investigated the utility of self-report measures to screen for psychiatric comorbidities in autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). Thirty-eight 10-17 year olds with an ASD and without mental retardation completed: the Children's Depression Inventory-Short version (CDI-S), Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale (RCMAS), Conners-Wells Adolescent Self-report Scale-Short edition (CASS-S), and Short Leyton Obsessional Inventory-Child Version (SLOI-CV). Their parents were interviewed with the Autism Comorbidity Interview-Present and Lifetime (ACI-PL) to establish psychiatric diagnoses. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and reliability coefficients were calculated for each self-report and compared to values from literature. The CDI-S and CASS-S yielded a high number of false negatives, with lower sensitivities and specificities in the sample than the literature. There was a nearly significant difference in total mean RCMAS scores between participants with and without anxiety, though again the means for both groups were below the threshold of concern. The SLOI-CV yielded a high false positive rate. All four instruments had reliability coefficients comparable to literature values. Results must be considered preliminary due to sample size. However, the findings suggest that although self-report instruments may provide useful information in the diagnosis of psychiatric comorbidities in ASD, caution must be exercised in their interpretation.

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.rasd.2010.03.006

Cites

41 of 41 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?

  • Consequently, researchers have often avoided attending to first-person testimony, preferring to privilege reports from parents, teachers or other informants, or laboratory-based observation over considering the perspectives of the person themselves.

    “Consequently, researchers have often avoided attending to first‐person testimony, preferring to privilege reports from parents, teachers or other informants, or laboratory‐based observation over considering the perspectives of the person themselves (Jaswal & Akhtar, 2018; Mazefsky, Kao, & Oswald, 2011; McGeer, 2004; Milton, 2012).”

    From Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’ to neurodiversity in autism science (2022) · cites this paper as Mazefsky, Kao, & Oswald, 2011

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Alexithymia has been well-documented in autism spectrum disorder.

    “First, alexithymia, or difficulty identifying, distinguishing, and describing emotions, has been well-documented in ASD.17,18,19”

    From Emotion Regulation (2014) · cites this paper as [18]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Harrison PL Oakland T 2003 Adaptive behavior assessment system second edition manual San Antonio Harcourt Assessment Inc

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mazefsky, C. A., Kao, J., & Oswald, D. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Virginia Commonwealth University (US)
Corresponding author
Mazefsky, C.A.
Venue
Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
164-174
ISSN
  • 1878-0237 (ISSN-L)
  • 1750-9467
OpenAlex
W2077644735
Cited by
325
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 10
FWCI
9.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Research in Autism (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Organization for Autism Research
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K23HD060601, L40 HD051318)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, high-functioning autism, adolescents, psychiatric comorbidity, self-report measures, depression screening, anxiety screening, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, screening sensitivity and specificity, false positives and false negatives

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