Assessment of clinical symptoms requires information from multiple informants. Discrepancies between informants' ratings can have significant implications in school settings (e.g., access to services, treatment planning, progress monitoring). This study examined parent-teacher discrepancies for ratings of internalizing and externalizing symptoms, and adaptive skills of high-functioning children with autism spectrum disorder. A total of 236 Behavior Assessment System for Children-2nd Edition ratings of children with high-functioning children with autism spectrum disorder from 2 informant groups (parents and teachers) were analyzed. Each informant pair (n = 118 parents/caregivers and n = 118 teachers) rated the same child. Scores on the Internalizing Problems, Externalizing Problems, and Adaptive Skills Composites were examined for mean differences, level of agreement, linear relationship, and moderators of discrepancies. There were no significant mean differences between raters for the Internalizing and Externalizing Composites or their constituent scales (except Hyperactivity). Parent-teacher ratings on these composites and scales were significantly correlated (generally moderate), and the discrepancies were not moderated by the included child or parent variables. In contrast, teacher ratings were significantly higher than parents for the Adaptive Skills Composite and several of its constituent scales. Correlations between informants on the Adaptive Skills Composite were significant (low-to-moderate), with notable variability in the correlations among its constituent scales. The degree of parent-teacher discrepancy differed significantly across the Adaptive Skills Composite score range, but it was not moderated by the included child or parent variables. This study suggests a reduced likelihood of informant discrepancies for externalizing and internalizing symptoms, with larger discrepancies expected when assessing adaptive skills. (PsycINFO Database Record
This study compared parent and teacher ratings of ASD-related symptoms of 120 high-functioning children, ages 6-12 years with ASD (HFASD) using the Developmental Social Disorders (DSD) scale of the BASC-2. DSD ratings (parent and teacher) were significantly higher than normative estimates. The cross-informant comparison was significantly higher for parents (vs. teachers), and correlations (ICC and Pearson) between the informant groups were significant (but low in magnitude). Agreement among parents and teachers accurately placed 81 % of cases above the at-risk cutpoint for symptoms of ASD, and agreement was highest in the at-risk range of perceived symptoms. Additional analyses indicated a significant difference in the trend across the parent-teacher discrepancies, and no significant moderators of the discrepancies. Implications for assessment are provided.
This study extended the research on correlates of adaptive functioning of high-functioning children with autism spectrum disorder (HFASD) using the Behavior Assessment System for Children-Second Edition (BASC-2). Specifically, this study investigated the relationships between adaptive behavior and age, IQ, and ASD symptomology, in a well-characterized sample of 119 children with HFASD, ages 6-11 years. Results revealed age and IQ were not significantly correlated with adaptive ability. However, total autism symptoms [measured by the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R)], as well as ASD-social symptoms were negatively correlated with adaptive ability. Mean comparisons revealed that participants falling into the clinically-significant range of the BASC-2 Adaptive Skills Composite (ASC) displayed significantly greater levels of both overall and social ASD symptoms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.