Sorry, I forget not everyone is as up-to-date on related studies on the subject from earlier this year that are not TFA: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-

Sorry, I forget not everyone is as up-to-date on related studies on the subject from earlier this year that are not TFA: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-025-02224-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-025-02224-z The study "speaks to the need to be a bit more fine-grained in our approaches to diagnosis" with subtypes rather than a single condition, as one of the authors put it, there. Additional context: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/four-new-autism-subtypes-link-genes-to-childrens-traits/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/four-new-autism-s... Nobody's making the argument that the DSM-4 had it right: the argument being made is that the DSM-5's direction of fewer categories and more generalization was the wrong direction, and going instead towards more categories and less generalization was and is the right direction for increasing understanding, treatment attempt outcomes, and greater efficiency in diagnosing and serving those with greater needs.