IJE Advance Access originally published online on September 7, 2009
International Journal of Epidemiology 2009 38(5):1239-1241; doi:10.1093/ije/dyp258
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association © The Author 2009; all rights reserved.
Commentary: Diagnostic change and the increased prevalence of autism
Department of Public Health Sciences, M.I.N.D. (Medical Investigations of Neurodevelopmental Disorders) Institute, University of California Davis, Davis, California, USA.
E-mail: ihp@ucdavis.edu
Accepted 23 September 2008
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
Parsing increases in autism diagnoses into the proportion arising from changes in criteria, awareness, diagnostic practices and methodology, versus the fraction representing a true rise in incidence, is not easy. Recently, we found three artefacts—younger age at diagnosis, change in the accepted criteria and inclusion of milder cases—accounted for about one-third of a 12-year rise in incidence in California.1 We did not tackle other factors.
King and Bearman2 undertook a daunting task to quantitatively estimate the contribution of diagnostic substitution to the rise in autism. The challenge is to determine how today's children would have been viewed through the eyes
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Bearman and M. King Author's Response Commentaries on diagnostic accretion and the increased prevalence of measured autism Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2009; 38(5): 1243 - 1244. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Bresnahan, G. Li, and E. Susser Hidden in plain sight Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2009; 38(5): 1172 - 1174. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
