4.4 Article

Identification of core functioning features for assessment and intervention in Autism Spectrum Disorders

期刊

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
卷 35, 期 2, 页码 125-133

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2012.690494

关键词

Autism; biopsychosocial; core-set; functionality; ICF-CY

资金

  1. FCT-Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia
  2. QREN, POPH, 7degrees Programa Quadro

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Framed within a biopsychosocial approach, this study aimed to identify the main functionality dimensions that experts in the field of child development and child psychopathology considered as essential in the assessmentintervention process with young children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD), using the International Classification of Functionality, Disability and Health for Children and Youth. Method: The Delphi method was used to obtain consensus among experts regarding the essential functionality features for the rehabilitation of young children with ASD. Therefore, web-based three-round survey was developed. Results: There are more functionality features identified as more essential for the age group 3-6 than from the group birth-2 years of age. 49.4% of activities and participation dimensions were regarded as essential by experts, while only 13.9% of body functions were selected. 39.9% of environmental factors were also marked by experts as essential. Conclusions: Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD) are classified in diagnostic manuals-DSM-IV-TR and ICD-10. These classifications are valuable to detect signs/symptoms of health conditions; however, they are often not sufficient to develop individualized interventions. More functional information is needed to complement diagnostic data. The identified functionality dimensions of the ICF-CY complement diagnosis by differentiating relevant functioning aspects in all life domains, according to the biopsychosocial model and should always be addressed in the process of rehabilitation of young children with ASD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据