Elsevier

Research in Developmental Disabilities

Volume 29, Issue 6, November–December 2008, Pages 537-546
Research in Developmental Disabilities

The validity of the autism spectrum disorders-diagnosis for intellectually disabled adults (ASD-DA)

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2007.09.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Psychologists interviewed direct-care staff using a battery of assessment measures including the autism spectrum disorders-diagnosis for intellectually disabled adults (ASD-DA), the Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped-II (DASH-II), the Matson Evaluation of Social Skills for Individuals with Severe Retardation (MESSIER), the Socialization domain of the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS), and a checklist containing criteria for autism and PDD-NOS from the DSM-IV-TR and ICD-10. Three hundred and seven intellectually disabled (ID) adolescents and adults ranging in age from 16 to 88 were assessed. Participants were diagnosed with either ID and ASD (autism or PDD-NOS; n = 156) or ID and no Axis I diagnosis (n = 151). A modification of the multitrait–multimethod approach was used to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of the ASD-DA. The scale proved to have robust convergent validity when correlated with the DSM-IV-TR/ICD-10 checklist, MESSIER, and Socialization domain of the VABS. Additionally, discriminant validity was demonstrated by comparing the ASD-DA to items from the DASH-II (measure of general psychopathology). The implications of these data are discussed.

Introduction

Researchers have argued that autism spectrum disorders (ASD) should no longer be viewed as rare (Filipek et al., 1999). This hypothesis may be driven at least in part by the rapidly evolving development of methods to assess ASD (Matson, 2007; Matson & Boisjoli, 2007; Matson & Wilkins, 2008). Additionally, methods of identifying a number of ASD have been emphasized in recent publications (Tidmarsh & Volkmar, 2003). The fact that these developments are rather new is exemplified by the fact that only autism, of the five ASD, was included in the DSM-III. More recently, a broader range of conditions have been included in the DSM-IV under the rubric of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (Volkmar et al., 1994), a term sometimes used interchangeably with ASD. Five conditions are included with PDD-NOS, autism, and Asperger's syndrome being the most common. Some have argued that these three disorders occur on a continuum of severity of autistic symptoms and/or level of intellectual ability (Towbin, 1997). Rett's Disorder and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder are included in the ASD grouping, but they tend to be quite rare, and at present, have clearer biological markers. Thus, in practice, most diagnostic research has focused on the three former disorders, with particular emphasis on autism and PDD-NOS since Asperger's syndrome does not occur in those with intellectual disability (ID).

Researchers have argued that common to all five ASD conditions are deficits in socialization and communication in addition to the presence of restricted or repetitive behaviors and interests (Bolton et al., 1994; Castelloe & Dawson, 1993; Chung et al., 2007; Hilton, Graver, & LaVesser, 2007; Ingersoll & Gergans, 2007; Wing, 1997). Methodologically, autism and scales that are used exclusively to diagnose autism have dominated the literature (Matson, Nebel-Schwalm, & Matson, 2007). Furthermore, most of the diagnostic research consists of correlating a scale for autism with a pre-existing group established via a DSM diagnosis (Matson et al., 2007a, Matson et al., 2007b, Matson et al., 2008). One of three conditions usually comprises the second group—PDD-NOS, ID, or autism. The people studied are invariably children, typically 3–7 years of age. This approach is very understandable given the view that early recognition and thus treatment can result in better long-term outcome (Honda & Shimizu, 2002; Matson & Minshawi, 2006). However, researchers have pointed out the difficulty in categorizing ASD, both across specific forms of the spectrum and when compared to nonspectrum individuals. Criteria for making such distinctions, at present, have been described as arbitrary (Williams & Brayne, 2006). Additionally, these conditions tend to persist over time. While some controversy exists, most researchers state that prognosis is poor for the condition (Howlin, Goode, Hutton, & Rutter, 2004).

Researchers have consistently reported on the persistence of ASD symptoms (Nordin & Gillberg, 1998). For example, in the Camberwell study, fully 3/4 of the children diagnosed with ASD who were followed up 12 years later still evinced this disability (Beadle-Brown et al., 2002). However, studies aimed at developing methods to differentially diagnose autism and ASD in adults with ID have been practically nonexistent. Whether these disorders are still present and the extent and nature of the symptoms displayed in adulthood would appear to be a worthy area for investigation.

The general view is that about 70% of persons with autism are also intellectually disabled (Ben-Itzchak & Zachor, 2007; Croen, Greher, Hoostrate, & Selvin, 2002; Edelson, 2006; Magnusson & Saemundsen, 2001). Additionally, other forms of ASD have a notable overlap with ID, particularly PDD-NOS (Bouras, Holt, Day, & Dosen, 1999; Kraijer, 1997; LaMalfa, Lassi, Bertelli, Salvini, & Placidi, 2004). Often, researchers and diagnosticians have had difficulty differentiating the symptoms of ASD versus ID, and this difficulty increases as severity of ID increases (Hare, Mellor, & Azmi, 2007; LaMalfa et al., 2004; Matson, Dempsey et al., 2008). Thus, a test that could differentiate adults with ID from those with autism or PDD-NOS and ID, particularly with individuals in the severe/profound range of ID, would be especially useful.

The present study was designed to test the convergent and discriminant validity of a new scale for differentially diagnosing ASD from ID as well as different ASD. A modification of the multitrait–multimethod approach, first described by Campbell and Fiske (1959), was used to establish the psychometric properties of the scale. This approach is considered to be a particularly stringent means of establishing the psychometric validity of a construct.

Section snippets

Participants

The sample for this study consisted of 307 adolescents and adults with profound (n = 235), severe (n = 40), moderate (n = 16), mild (n = 2), or unspecified ID (n = 14). Participants ranged in age from 16 to 88 with a mean age of 52 years. There were 168 males and 139 females in the sample. All of these individuals were residents of one of two developmental centers in central or south Louisiana, which varied in size from 350 to 550 residents. Participants were diagnosed by licensed psychologists at the

Results

The matrix of Pearson-product moment correlations among the five measures is presented in Table 3. The means and standard deviations of the scores on each test are also included. The convergent validity of the ASD-DA was demonstrated by correlating it with the DSM-IV-TR/ICD-10 checklist, MESSIER, and VABS. As predicted, the ASD-DA had a high positive correlation with the DSM-IV-TR/ICD-10 checklist (r = .60, p < .01) and high negative correlations with both the total score of the MESSIER (r = −.67, p < 

Discussion

In the largest field trial with children using DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria, both measures proved to have good sensitivity and specificity with children evincing ASD compared to other disorders (Volkmar et al., 1994). No such studies have been conducted for ASD adults with ID. However, by extrapolation from this and related child studies, it is the best available class assignment method to this point for adults (Charman, 2002, Myhr, 1998). Having said this, a scale with good reliability and

References (57)

  • J.L. Matson et al.

    The effects of intellectual Functioning on the range of core symptoms of autism spectrum disorders

    Research in Developmental Disabilities

    (2008)
  • J.L. Matson et al.

    Validity of the sleep subscale of the Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped-II (DASH-II)

    Research in Developmental Disabilities

    (2006)
  • J.L. Matson et al.

    A review of the methodological issues in the differential diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders in children

    Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders

    (2007)
  • J.L. Matson et al.

    A critical review of assessment targets and methods for Social skills excesses and deficits for children with autism spectrum disorders

    Research in Autism Spectrum Disorder

    (2007)
  • J.L. Matson et al.

    Nosology and diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome

    Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders

    (2008)
  • A. Percy et al.

    Rett syndrome and the autistic disorders

    Neurologic Clinics

    (1990)
  • J. Sigafoos et al.

    Assessing correspondence following acquisition of an exchange-based communication system

    Research in Developmental Disabilities

    (2007)
  • D. Allen et al.

    Autistic children are also dysphasic

  • American Psychiatric Association

    Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

    (2000)
  • J.W. Bamburg et al.

    Assessment of schizophrenia in presons with severe and profound mental retardation using the Diagnostic Assessment for the Severely Handicapped (DASH II)

    Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities

    (2001)
  • J. Beadle-Brown et al.

    Changes in social impairment for people with intellectual disabilities: A follow-up of the Camberwell cohort

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (2002)
  • P. Bolton et al.

    A case–control family history study of autism

    Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry

    (1994)
  • W. Bouras et al.

    Mental health in mental retardation. The ABC for mental health primary care and other professionals

    (1999)
  • D.T. Campbell et al.

    Convergent and discriminate validation by the multitrait–multimethod matrix

    Psychological Bulletin

    (1959)
  • P. Castelloe et al.

    Subclassification of children with autism and pervasive developmental disorder: A questionnaire based on Wing's subgrouping scheme

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (1993)
  • T. Charman

    The prevalence of autism spectrum disorders: Recent evidence and future challenges

    European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

    (2002)
  • T. Charman et al.

    Infants with autism: An investigation of empathy, pretend play, joint attention and imitation

    Developmental Psychology

    (1997)
  • L.A. Croen et al.

    The changing prevalence of autism in California

    Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders

    (2002)
  • Cited by (57)

    • MUSAD-Short – A music-based screening tool to assess autism spectrum disorder in people with intellectual disability

      2022, Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders
      Citation Excerpt :

      Fortunately, several ID-specific screening measures have been developed in recent years. Most of these scales – such as the Autism Spectrum Disorders-Diagnosis for Intellectually Disabled Adults (ASD-DA; Matson, Wilkins, Boisjoli, & Smith, 2008), the Scale of Pervasive Developmental Disorder in Mentally Retarded Persons (PDD-MRS; Kraijer & Bildt, 2005), the Social Communication Questionnaire for adults with intellectual disability (SCQ-AID; Derks et al., 2017), the Diagnostic Behavioral Assessment for ASD-Revised (DiBAS-R; Sappok et al., 2015), or the Autism-Checklist (ACL; Sappok, Heinrich, & Diefenbacher, 2014) – are short third-party rating scales scored by psychological professionals (e.g., ACL or PDD-MRS) or close caregivers familiar with the individuals' typical behavior in the time preceding the assessment (e.g., ASD-DA, DiBAS-R, SCQ-AID). Indeed, all these screening measures can provide initial diagnostic evidence in a comprehensive diagnostic procedure.

    • Autism Spectrum Disorder: Classification, diagnosis and therapy

      2018, Pharmacology and Therapeutics
      Citation Excerpt :

      The DISCO, which takes 2 to 3 h to administer, uses a dimensional approach for assessment rather than cut off points, and aims to closely assess, over the course of many years, the patterns of impairments in social behaviors and communications in individuals suspected of exhibiting ASD symptoms. The Autism Spectrum Disorder–Diagnosis Scale for Intellectually Disabled Adults (ASD-DA) is used to distinguish adults with intellectual disability (ID) and ASD from adults with ID only (Matson, Wilkins, Boisjoli, & Smith, 2008). The ASD-DA consists of 31 items that cover the three core deficits (social impairment, deficits in communication, and restricted interests), can be administered in 10 min, and typically scored as “0” (no impairment) or “1” (impairment).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text