Nederlands Interview ten behoeve van Diagnostiek Autismespectrumstoornis bij volwassenen

Vuijk, Richard

doi:10.1037/t86141-000

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mood disorders and ANX were diagnosed by means of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM‐IV Axis I Disorders (SCID‐I; First et al, 1997). For ASD and ADHD, a diagnosis was provided based on the results from the Dutch Interview for the Diagnosis of ASD in adults (NIDA; Vuijk, 2016) and Diagnostic Interview for ADHD in adults (DIVA; Kooij & Francken, 2010), respectively. Substance use disorders (SUD) were diagnosed according to DSM‐5 criteria and an adapted version of the Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation (MATE; Schippers et al, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi‐polygenic scores in psychiatry: From disorder specific to transdiagnostic perspectives

Shi

Sprooten

Mulders

et al. 2023

American J of Med Genetics Pt B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dense co‐occurrence of psychiatric disorders questions the categorical classification tradition and motivates efforts to establish dimensional constructs with neurobiological foundations that transcend diagnostic boundaries. In this study, we examined the genetic liability for eight major psychiatric disorder phenotypes under both a disorder‐specific and a transdiagnostic framework. The study sample (n = 513) was deeply phenotyped, consisting of 452 patients from tertiary care with mood disorders, anxiety disorders (ANX), attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorders, and/or substance use disorders (SUD) and 61 unaffected comparison individuals. We computed subject‐specific polygenic risk score (PRS) profiles and assessed their associations with psychiatric diagnoses, comorbidity status, as well as cross‐disorder behavioral dimensions derived from a rich battery of psychopathology assessments. High PRSs for depression were unselectively associated with the diagnosis of SUD, ADHD, ANX, and mood disorders (p < 1e‐4). In the dimensional approach, four distinct functional domains were uncovered, namely the negative valence, social, cognitive, and regulatory systems, closely matching the major functional domains proposed by the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework. Critically, the genetic predisposition for depression was selectively reflected in the functional aspect of negative valence systems (R2 = 0.041, p = 5e‐4) but not others. This study adds evidence to the ongoing discussion about the misalignment between current psychiatric nosology and the underlying psychiatric genetic etiology and underscores the effectiveness of the dimensional approach in both the functional characterization of psychiatric patients and the delineation of the genetic liability for psychiatric disorders.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi‐polygenic scores in psychiatry: From disorder specific to transdiagnostic perspectives

Shi

Sprooten

Mulders

et al. 2023

American J of Med Genetics Pt B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Structured Interview Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation (MATE; Schippers & Broekman, 2010) was used to assess substance use disorders. The Diagnostic Interview for ADHD in adults, second edition (DIVA 2.0; Kooij & Francken, 2010) was used to diagnose ADHD, and the Dutch Interview for Autism Spectrum Disorders in Adults (NIDA; Vuijk, 2014) was used to diagnose ASD. Before the diagnostic interview of the DIVA and the NIDA were administered, a clinician explained the patient that it is necessary to administer this interview in the presence of a significant other.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anhedonia as a transdiagnostic symptom across psychological disorders: a network approach

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Anhedonia is apparent in different mental disorders and is suggested to be related to dysfunctions in the reward system and/or affect regulation. It may hence be a common underlying feature associated with symptom severity of mental disorders. Methods We constructed a cross-sectional graphical Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) network and a relative importance network to estimate the relationships between anhedonia severity and the severity of symptom clusters of major depressive disorder (MDD), anxiety sensitivity (AS), attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in a sample of Dutch adult psychiatric patients (N = 557). Results Both these networks revealed anhedonia severity and depression symptom severity as central to the network. Results suggest that anhedonia severity may be predictive of the severity of symptom clusters of MDD, AS, ADHD, and ASD. MDD symptom severity may be predictive of AS and ADHD symptom severity. Conclusions The results suggest that anhedonia may serve as a common underlying transdiagnostic psychopathology feature, predictive of the severity of symptom clusters of depression, AS, ADHD, and ASD. Thus, anhedonia may be associated with the high comorbidity between these symptom clusters and disorders. If our results will be replicated in future studies, it is recommended for clinicians to be more vigilant about screening for anhedonia and/or depression severity in individuals diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, ADHD and/or ASD.

show abstract

“…For screening on ASD traits, we use the Autism Spectrum Quotient (AQ-50) [15]. When a patient scores positive on this instrument (50 items, cutoff >25), we next use the Dutch Interview for the Diagnosis of ASD in Adults (NIDA) [16] to diagnose ASD according to the DSM-5. Regarding ADHD, we use the World Health Organization Adult ADHD Self-report Scale short version for screening [17].…”

Section: Descriptive Psychopathology Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring Integrated Novel Dimensions in Neurodevelopmental and Stress-Related Mental Disorders (MIND-SET): Protocol for a Cross-sectional Comorbidity Study From a Research Domain Criteria Perspective

Eijndhoven¹,

Vrijsen²,

Geurts³

et al. 2022

JMIRx Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background It is widely acknowledged that comorbidity between psychiatric disorders is common. Shared and diverse underpinnings of psychiatric disorders cannot be systematically understood based on symptom-based categories of mental disorders, which map poorly onto pathophysiological mechanisms. In the Measuring Integrated Novel Dimensions in Neurodevelopmental and Stress-Related Mental Disorders (MIND-SET) study, we make use of current concepts of comorbidity that transcend the current diagnostic categories. We test this approach to psychiatric problems in patients with frequently occurring psychiatric disorders and their comorbidities (excluding psychosis). Objective The main aim of the MIND-SET project is to determine the shared and specific mechanisms of neurodevelopmental and stress-related psychiatric disorders at different observational levels. Methods This is an observational cross-sectional study. Data from different observational levels as defined in the Research Domain Criteria (genetics, physiology, neuropsychology, system-level neuroimaging, behavior, self-report, and experimental neurocognitive paradigms) are collected over four time points. Included are adult (aged ≥18 years), nonpsychotic, psychiatric patients with a clinical diagnosis of a stress-related disorder (mood disorder, anxiety disorder, or substance use disorder) or a neurodevelopmental disorder (autism spectrum disorder or attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder). Individuals with no current or past psychiatric diagnosis are included as neurotypical controls. Data collection started in June 2016 with the aim to include a total of 650 patients and 150 neurotypical controls by 2021. The data collection procedure includes online questionnaires and three subsequent sessions with (1) standardized clinical examination, physical examination, and blood sampling; (2) psychological constructs, neuropsychological tests, and biological marker sampling; and (3) neuroimaging measures. Results We aim to include a total of 650 patients and 150 neurotypical control participants in the time period between 2016 and 2022. In October 2021, we are at 95% of our target. Conclusions The MIND-SET study enables us to investigate the mechanistic underpinnings of nonpsychotic psychiatric disorders transdiagnostically. We will identify both shared and disorder-specific markers at different observational levels that can be used as targets for future diagnostic and treatment approaches.

show abstract

Nederlands Interview ten behoeve van Diagnostiek Autismespectrumstoornis bij volwassenen

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Multi‐polygenic scores in psychiatry: From disorder specific to transdiagnostic perspectives

Multi‐polygenic scores in psychiatry: From disorder specific to transdiagnostic perspectives

Anhedonia as a transdiagnostic symptom across psychological disorders: a network approach

Measuring Integrated Novel Dimensions in Neurodevelopmental and Stress-Related Mental Disorders (MIND-SET): Protocol for a Cross-sectional Comorbidity Study From a Research Domain Criteria Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About