3 ms·

Do you think it could be LLM-generated content in regards to two versus three?

runarberg 2y ago
Hardly, the study it self refers to which subtypes they are talking about in the conclusion: > the biological bases of two subtypes of ASD social and brain development—profound autism and mild autism. The Methodology section actually specifies they are using DSM-V (sic) and “Mann–Whitney U to test ASD clinical subtype differences in symptom severity” as well as that they test for IQ. They also specify which instruments they used to test symptom severity, neither of which actually measures subtypes of autism. This is highly confusing as DSM-5 does not have any subtypes of autism. It has 3 severity levels for two of the symptoms criteria which is used to specify the accommodation needs. Those symptoms criteria is social communication and repetitive and fixated behavior. Intellectual ability is not on this severity level, instead psychiatrists are instructed to specify whether or not autism is accompanied with intellectual impairment. Further if you look at their table 1[1] you can see what they mean by the two subtypes, which is basically, low IQ vs. normal IQ. This is actually much closer to ICD-11 where one of the 8 subtype of autism is 6A02.0 - without disorder of intellectual development and with mild or not impairment of functional language. So it looks like the authors used DSM-5 to diagnose autism, and then used the philosophy behind ICD-11 amend the DSM-5 diagnosis. Note that the ICD-11 approach has been heavily criticized as researchers have shown pretty thoroughly that there is hardly any correlation between intellectual ability (or IQ) and other symptoms of autism. That is the only reason to specify intellectual impairment at all is so that autistic individuals with intellectual impairment need additional accommodations for their disabilities. I suspect what happened here is that the reason they specified these two supposed sub-types of autism is political. That they basically took what used to be called Asperger’s and said that was one of two subtypes of autism. 1: https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-024-00602-8/tables/1 https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...
- hammyhavoc 2y ago
  Thank you for this, extremely appreciative of it.

Hardly, the study it self refers to which subtypes they are talking about in the conclusion: > the biological bases of two subtypes of ASD social and brain development—profound autism and mild autism. The Methodology section actually specifies they are using DSM-V (sic) and “Mann–Whitney U to test ASD clinical subtype differences in symptom severity” as well as that they test for IQ. They also specify which instruments they used to test symptom severity, neither of which actually measures subtypes of autism. This is highly confusing as DSM-5 does not have any subtypes of autism. It has 3 severity levels for two of the symptoms criteria which is used to specify the accommodation needs. Those symptoms criteria is social communication and repetitive and fixated behavior. Intellectual ability is not on this severity level, instead psychiatrists are instructed to specify whether or not autism is accompanied with intellectual impairment. Further if you look at their table 1[1] you can see what they mean by the two subtypes, which is basically, low IQ vs. normal IQ. This is actually much closer to ICD-11 where one of the 8 subtype of autism is 6A02.0 - without disorder of intellectual development and with mild or not impairment of functional language. So it looks like the authors used DSM-5 to diagnose autism, and then used the philosophy behind ICD-11 amend the DSM-5 diagnosis. Note that the ICD-11 approach has been heavily criticized as researchers have shown pretty thoroughly that there is hardly any correlation between intellectual ability (or IQ) and other symptoms of autism. That is the only reason to specify intellectual impairment at all is so that autistic individuals with intellectual impairment need additional accommodations for their disabilities. I suspect what happened here is that the reason they specified these two supposed sub-types of autism is political. That they basically took what used to be called Asperger’s and said that was one of two subtypes of autism. 1: https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13229-024-00602-8/tables/1 https://molecularautism.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s...

hammyhavoc 2y ago
Thank you for this, extremely appreciative of it.