Differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders, complex post‐traumatic stress disorder and emotionally unstable personality disorder: A Delphi study.
Saved in:
| Title: | Differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders, complex post‐traumatic stress disorder and emotionally unstable personality disorder: A Delphi study. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Sarr, Rachel, Spain, Debbie, Quinton, Alice M. G., Happé, Francesca, Brewin, Chris R., Radcliffe, Jonathan, Jowett, Sally, Miles, Sarah, González, Rafael A., Albert, Idit, Scholwin, Alix, Stirling, Marguerite, Markham, Sarah, Strange, Sally, Rumball, Freya |
| Source: | British Journal of Psychology. Feb2025, Vol. 116 Issue 1, p1-33. 33p. |
| Subjects: | Diagnosis of autism, Personality disorder diagnosis, Diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, Nurses, Work, Differential diagnosis, Psychologists, Social workers, Research funding, Questionnaires, Statistical sampling, Judgment sampling, Attitudes of medical personnel, Asperger's syndrome, Delphi method, Reactive attachment disorder, Experiential learning, Adolescence, Adults |
| Abstract: | Individuals diagnosed with autism, attachment disorders, emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD) or complex post‐traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) can present with similar features. This renders differential and accurate diagnosis of these conditions difficult, leading to diagnostic overshadowing and misdiagnosis. The purpose of this study was to explore professionals' perspectives on the differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders and CPTSD in young people; and of autism, CPTSD and EUPD in adults. A co‐produced three‐round Delphi study gathered information through a series of questionnaires from 106 international professionals with expertise in assessing and/or diagnosing at least one of these conditions. To provide specialist guidance and data triangulation, working groups of experts by experience, clinicians and researchers were consulted. Delphi statements were considered to have reached consensus if at least 80% of participants were in agreement. Two hundred and seventy‐five Delphi statements reached consensus. Overlapping and differentiating features, methods of assessment, difficulties encountered during differential diagnosis and suggestions for improvements were identified. The findings highlight current practices for differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders, CPTSD and EUPD in young people and adults. Areas for future research, clinical and service provision implications, were also identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of British Journal of Psychology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Individuals diagnosed with autism, attachment disorders, emotionally unstable personality disorder (EUPD) or complex post‐traumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) can present with similar features. This renders differential and accurate diagnosis of these conditions difficult, leading to diagnostic overshadowing and misdiagnosis. The purpose of this study was to explore professionals' perspectives on the differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders and CPTSD in young people; and of autism, CPTSD and EUPD in adults. A co‐produced three‐round Delphi study gathered information through a series of questionnaires from 106 international professionals with expertise in assessing and/or diagnosing at least one of these conditions. To provide specialist guidance and data triangulation, working groups of experts by experience, clinicians and researchers were consulted. Delphi statements were considered to have reached consensus if at least 80% of participants were in agreement. Two hundred and seventy‐five Delphi statements reached consensus. Overlapping and differentiating features, methods of assessment, difficulties encountered during differential diagnosis and suggestions for improvements were identified. The findings highlight current practices for differential diagnosis of autism, attachment disorders, CPTSD and EUPD in young people and adults. Areas for future research, clinical and service provision implications, were also identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 00071269 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/bjop.12731 |
