Search results1 – 5 of 5
The Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA), comprising the Autism Questionnaire, the Empathy Quiotient and the Relatives Questionnaire is a commonly used screening tool designed…
The Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA), comprising the Autism Questionnaire, the Empathy Quiotient and the Relatives Questionnaire is a commonly used screening tool designed to identify adults who may benefit from a further clinical assessment for autism spectrum disorder. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usefulness of this screening measure in a clinical setting.
This retrospective cohort study comprised of 192 service users referred for diagnostic assessment of Autism by a specialist service of the National Health Service. The authors evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the AAA by investigating if the Autism Questionnaire, the Empathy Quiotient and the Relatives Questionnaire were able to predict the diagnostic outcome of Autism in a clinical setting.
Scores from the Relatives Questionnaire can accurately predict diagnostic outcome. No evidence of accuracy for the Autism Questionnaire or the Empathy Quotient was apparent. Based on the findings, the authors recommend clinicians are cautious when interpreting results of the AAA.
It should be acknowledged that the results may not be generalisable to whole populations. Also, the authors used the full item versions of the scales; therefore, the findings are most applicable to studies which did similar.
This study highlights the need for investigation into the lack of validation of commonly used screening measures in autistic populations.
This index covers all issues between February 2005 (Volume 9, Issue 1) and November 2008 (Volume 12, Issue 4). Numbers in bold refer to yolume, numbers in brackets refer to issue, with subsequent numbers to pages.
A policy of surveillance which interferes with the fundamental right to a private life requires credible justification and a supportive evidence base. The authority for…
A policy of surveillance which interferes with the fundamental right to a private life requires credible justification and a supportive evidence base. The authority for such interference should be clearly detailed in law, overseen by a transparent process and not left to the vagaries of administrative discretion. If a state surveils those it governs and claims the interference to be in the public interest, then the evidence base on which that claim stands and the operative conception of public interest should be subject to critical examination. Unfortunately, there is an inconsistency in the regulatory burden associated with access to confidential patient information for non-health-related surveillance purposes and access for health-related surveillance or research purposes. This inconsistency represents a systemic weakness to inform or challenge an evidence-based policy of non-health-related surveillance. This inconsistency is unjustified and undermines the qualities recognised to be necessary to maintain a trustworthy confidential public health service. Taking the withdrawn Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between NHS Digital and the Home Office as a worked example, this chapter demonstrates how the capacity of the law to constrain the arbitrary or unwarranted exercise of power through judicial review is not sufficient to level the playing field. The authors recommend ‘levelling up’ in procedural oversight, and adopting independent mechanisms equivalent to those adopted for establishing the operative conceptions of public interest in the context of health research to non-health-related surveillance purposes.
SO much controversy has raged around the subject of newsrooms in the past two years, that librarians are, as a rule, utterly tired of it, and the appearance of still another article upon the subject is not calculated to tone down the general spirit of vexation. It requires no little courage to appear in the arena in this year of Grace, openly championing those departments of our institutions which were originally intended to convey the news of the day in the broadest manner.