Corrections/Updates

All changes/updates made will remain here on the Corrections post for at least a week.  After that time, the original blog entry will be updated to incorporate the changes or edited and linked to a second post depending on the nature of the correction/update.

First, I want to add a link to my post on Paul Corby.

I feel that this article does a good job of expanding on the rejection and corroborates the interpretation of the rejection and motives which were made by the other articles and myself.

Secondly, I have corrections to make to my first research post.  Next to this photo, I wrote the following:
"I would like to take this opportunity to field a few disagreements I had with a presenter regarding this exact thing...

She put a chart on the wall which showed diagnoses of ASD's.  It was reflecting individuals up to the age of 21 who were diagnosed and how the incidence of ASD's was increasing.

The information was labelled by year, the year that the person was diagnosed.  I pointed out at least 2 problems with her data-set, just upon a cursory glance:
1a) As the data wasn't standardized by the child's age (ie. anyone who was diagnosed, they were counted in the year they were X years of age... if X=9, then a person diagnosed in 2001 at age 8 would be counted in 2002 and a person diagnosed in 2001 at 20 would be counted in 1990) so the numbers could be skewed/altered by diagnostic experience - especially as "Asperger's Syndrome" didn't make it into the DSM until DSM-IV in 1994 (the text-revision was published in 2000) ... you'll notice that automatically means the Aspie I identified in my example would have been 13 and unlikely to have been diagnosed."

While it is true that I attended a presentation where a information was presented which did not correlate the data by age, I need to note that the CDC information is based solely on populations of children who were eight years of age as of each year of study.  Therefore, the data presented in this graph is not skewed by ages of diagnoses.

I would also like to add the following:
The 2012 ADDM Community Report was based on the data obtained during the 2008 study.  In the opening they noted that the "estimated prevalence of ASDs increased 23% during 2006 to 2008 and 78% during 2002 to 2008... We know that some of the increase is probably due to the way children are identified and served in local communities..."  One of their key findings was that "The majority (62%) of children the ADDM Network identified as having ASDs did not have intellectual disability. The largest increases during 2002 to 2008 were among children without intellectual disability (those having IQ scores higher than 70), although there were increases in the identified prevalence of ASDs at all levels of intellectual ability."

Although the DSM-IV-TR lists ASD's under Pervasive Developmental Disorders, only three of those diagnoses [Autistic Disorder, Aspgerger's, and PDD-NOS] are considered ASD's while the other two [Rett's Syndrom and Childhood Disintegration Disorder] are considered Pervasive Developmental Disorders.  [Citations for this include the above-refernced Community Report which lists the three ASD's and MMWR Vol.55 (17) pg 481 which specifies how all five PDD's are classified.]

I have been looking closer at the originating data [the MMWR articles as opposed to the extrapolated ADDM presentations] and other CDC publications/resources in order to prepare additional information to go along with the above.  Right now I will note that the DSM-V Proposal separates ASD from comorbin conditions which will give clearer information.  Unfortunately it probably will not be until 2016 when we get the ADDM data from 2012 and then another two-to-three years after that before we start seeing the data under the newer classification.

That is all I have for you right now.  I am currently working on two "science-y" posts [one dealing with prevalence and other useful trends/information and one dealing with filicide which will be very cheery], an Americans with Disabilities Act post, and a an assortment of personal-experience posts.  The next post will likely be a personal post, then the ADA post, then likely the ASD prevalence/info post.  Anyway, that is the two-week "forecast" for Just Plucky! and I hope you stay tuned.