Utility of the Gilliam Autism Rating Scale in Research and Clinical Populations
- 862 Downloads
The Gilliam Autism Rating Scale (GARS) was developed as a relatively easy, inexpensive aid in the surveillance and diagnosis of autism. This study examined the validity of the GARS when used with a sample of 119 children with strict DSM-IV diagnoses of autism, ascertained from both clinical and research settings. The GARS consistently underestimated the likelihood that autistic children in this sample would be classified as having autism. The sample mean for the Autism Quotient, a hypothesized index of the likelihood of having autism, was 90.10, significantly below the reference mean of 100. Diagnostic classification according to criteria specified by the GARS resulted in a sensitivity of only .48. Limitations of rating scales in general and of the GARS specifically are discussed. It is recommended that clinicians and researchers using or considering using the GARS for autism diagnosis or ratings of autism severity recognize the need for further research regarding its use.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Children with Disabilities (1994). Screening infants and young children for developmental disabilities. Pediatrics, 93, 863–865.Google Scholar
- American Psychiatric Association (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
- Berument, S. K., Rutter, M., Lord, C., Pickles, A., & Bailey, A. (1999). Autism Screening Questionnaire: Diagnostic validity. British Journal of Psychiatry, 175, 444–451.Google Scholar
- California Departments of Education and Developmental Services Collaborative Work Group on Autistic Spectrum Disorders (July, 1997). Best Practices for Designing and Delivering Effective Programs for Individuals with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Available online at www.feat.org/CABP.Google Scholar
- Dawson, G., & Osterling, J. (1997). Early intervention in autism: Effectiveness and common elements of current approaches. In M. J. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention: Second generation research (pp. 307–326). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
- Gilliam, J. E. (1995). Gilliam Autism Rating Scale. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
- Lord, C., Risi, S., Lambrecht, L., Cook, E. H., Leventhal, B. L., DiLavore, P. et al. (2000). The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic: A standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 205–223.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sparrow, S., Balla, D., & Cicchetti, D. (1984). Vineland Scales of Adaptive Behavior, Survey Form Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
- Stone, W. L., Lee, E. B., Ashford, L., Brissie, J., Hepburn, S. L., Coonrod, E. E., & Weiss, B. (1999). Can autism be diagnosed accurately in children under three years? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 40, 216–226.Google Scholar
- Streiner, D. L. (1993). A checklist for evaluating the usefulness of rating scales. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 38, 140–148.Google Scholar
- Volkmar, F. R., Klin, A., & Cohen, D. J. (1997). Diagnosis and classification of autism and related conditions: Consensus and issues.In D. J. Cohen & F. R. Volkmar (Eds.), Handbook of Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders (2nd ed). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar