Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

The interrelationship between the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R), Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G) and clinical classification was studied in 184 children and adolescents with Mental Retardation (MR). The agreement between the ADI-R and ADOS-G was fair, with a substantial difference between younger and older children (5-8 vs. 8+ years). Compared with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV-TR (DSM-IV-TR) classification of Autistic Disorder (AD) and Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD), both instruments measure AD or PDD validly and reliably. Even in low-functioning children the interrelationship between the instruments and the clinical classification was satisfactory. The combination of ADI-R and ADOS-G identifies AD or PDD, as described in the DSM-IV-TR, most appropriately. Both instruments seem to be of great value in the diagnostic process of PDD in children and adolescents with MR.

Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) module 4 was investigated in an independent sample of high-functioning adult males with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) compared to three specific diagnostic groups: schizophrenia, psychopathy, and typical development. ADOS module 4 proves to be a reliable instrument with good predictive value. It can adequately discriminate ASD from psychopathy and typical development, but is less specific with respect to schizophrenia due to behavioral overlap between autistic and negative symptoms. However, these groups differ on some core items and explorative analyses indicate that a revision of the algorithm in line with Gotham et al. (J Autism Dev Disord 37: 613–627, 2007) could be beneficial for discriminating ASD from schizophrenia.

No abstract