Thursday, May 20, 2010
Franklin Hall B Level 4 (Philadelphia Marriott Downtown)
9:00 AM
Background: In Japan, government legislated "Developmental Disorders Support
Act" in 2004. We have tried to make assessment tools for not only screening
people with Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) but also grasping support
needs of them.
Objectives: A behavior checklist, the Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) ASJ
Rating Scale(PARS), was developed as a screening questionnaire to determine
Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) and also as a rating scale to evaluate
the severity of a wide range of PDD symptoms. PARS was constructed by two
rating, 37 toddlerhood items are evaluated retrospectively and 36 or 37 items are
used for current evaluation.
Methods: 317 PDD participants and 345 non-PDD participants were assessed using
PARS, and 174 PDD participants were assessed IQ for these purposes.
The subjects were recruited via the medical, psychological or educational institution.
The study was described to the subjects and written informed consent was obtained.
Diagnoses of either Autistic Disorder were made by a child psychiatrist and
based on DSM-IV criteria.
Results: In this study, the construct and criterion-referenced validity of the PARS was
tested on PDD and non-PDD samples. Interrater and internal reliability was found to be
adequate. Both the retrospectively evaluation scores and the current evaluation items
accurately discriminated PDD from non-PDD. The correlation between PARS and IQ demonstrated validity.
Conclusions: Result suggested that the PARS may be a useful screening scale for
a various clinical settings.
Act" in 2004. We have tried to make assessment tools for not only screening
people with Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) but also grasping support
needs of them.
Objectives: A behavior checklist, the Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) ASJ
Rating Scale(PARS), was developed as a screening questionnaire to determine
Pervasive Developmental Disorder(PDD) and also as a rating scale to evaluate
the severity of a wide range of PDD symptoms. PARS was constructed by two
rating, 37 toddlerhood items are evaluated retrospectively and 36 or 37 items are
used for current evaluation.
Methods: 317 PDD participants and 345 non-PDD participants were assessed using
PARS, and 174 PDD participants were assessed IQ for these purposes.
The subjects were recruited via the medical, psychological or educational institution.
The study was described to the subjects and written informed consent was obtained.
Diagnoses of either Autistic Disorder were made by a child psychiatrist and
based on DSM-IV criteria.
Results: In this study, the construct and criterion-referenced validity of the PARS was
tested on PDD and non-PDD samples. Interrater and internal reliability was found to be
adequate. Both the retrospectively evaluation scores and the current evaluation items
accurately discriminated PDD from non-PDD. The correlation between PARS and IQ demonstrated validity.
Conclusions: Result suggested that the PARS may be a useful screening scale for
a various clinical settings.