For PDD-NOS and ADHD, the diagnoses were made according to the criteria in the DSM-IV-TR. The diagnoses were based on the developmental histories of the children as revealed from clinical interviews with the parents, and on observation as well as extended neuropsychological testing of the children themselves. The children had been diagnosed by clinical psychologists or youth psychiatrists after consultation of other health care professionals working in the same multidisciplinary team. The range of IQ’s observed (FIQ) was 66–136 for PDD-NOS, 76–123 for ADHD, and 76–116 for the combined diagnosis. The mean age of the children was 9.7 years ( SD = 2.8) for the total sample, while the mean age was 10.1 years for the PDD-NOS group, 9.6 years for the ADHD group, and 11.2 years for the combined diagnosis group, respectively. The children were between 6 and 16 years of age. There were no significant differences among the groups with regard to sex (χ 2(2) = 2.15, p = .34).
#PERVASIVE DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDER NOS SYMPTOMS PLUS#
Fifty-five children had been diagnosed as having PPD-NOS (75% boys), 40 as having ADHD (80% boys), and 20 as having PPD-NOS plus ADHD (90% boys). The total sample consisted of 115 children, 91 of whom were boys, and 24 were girls. Intelligence was not used in any way as a criterion for including cases in our study, however. Children with mental retardation (FIQ < 70) were generally not referred to this institution. The children were first seen in the institution during the period 2003–2007 and had been referred, mostly by general practitioners or youth care organizations, because of behavioural problems or psycho-social maladjustment displayed in school or at home. This study was based on archival data, obtained in the child and adolescent department of a large outpatient institution for mental health in the south of the Netherlands. It is less problematic in research situations involving group comparisons, of course, since by calculating mean scores part of the random fluctuations present in the individual profiles are averaged out. This makes the subtest profile badly suited as an instrument in the diagnosis of a single patient. less reliable) than profiles composed of IQ scores, or than profiles composed of the Wechsler index scores: Verbal Comprehension, Perceptual Organization, Processing Speed and Freedom from Distractibility (Livingston et al. It has been shown, however, that subtest profiles are less stable (i.e. It is common practice for two main reasons: better diagnosis of individual patients, and gaining more insight in the strengths and weaknesses that characterize a certain condition. comparing Full-Scale or Total (FIQ), Verbal (VIQ) and Performance (PIQ) IQ scores, or even comparing subtest score profiles among different diagnostic groups, is often done. Investigating intelligence profiles, i.e. 2005), have confirmed that there are no sharp boundaries between the categories and that it is often difficult to diagnose children as belonging to either one. 1997 Perry 1998), as well as children that evolved in the opposite direction as they matured (Fein et al. Examples of clinical cases that had to be rediagnosed from ADHD to PPD-NOS (Jensen et al. It has been shown that social and communication problems typical for PDD-NOS occur in children with ADHD, while the symptoms of inattention and hyperactivity/impulsivity characterizing ADHD also occur in children with PDD-NOS (e.g. Due to this vagueness, it is not surprising that there is considerable comorbidity of PDD-NOS with the symptoms of other childhood disorders, of which those of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) belong to the most striking ones (De Bruin et al. The global definition of the concept PDD-NOS, which has also been referred to as a form of “mild autism”, has given rise to diverse interpretations and may lead to low diagnostic reliability (Luteijn et al.