Objectives The purpose of this study is to review pre-existing clinical practice guidelines for autism spectrum disorders, and refer those in developing a new practice guideline. Methods A total of 9 existing clinical practice guidelines for autism spectrum disorder developed from 2010 to 2016 were searched by Google scholar and Pubmed, and were reviewed those literatures in three parts: general, diagnosis & evaluation, and intervention. Results There were no consistency in the recommendation methods of 9 clinical care guidelines (such as the method of rating and recommendation intensity for diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment). However, in the diagnosis and evaluation section, frequently used evaluation and diagnostic tools are mentioned in most clinical practice guidelines, and the types of pharmacologic and non-pharmacological treatments that are mainly recommended in treatment are equally mentioned in most clinical practice guidelines could confirm. Conclusions 1. Some guideline recommendations are graded according to each criterion. Recommendations presented in various databases were based on systematic reviews or other literatures. The most utilized database were PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane. 2. DSM-5 and ICD-10 were the most common used diagnostic criteria, and DSM-IV was used as a diagnostic standard in the guideline published before 2013. The tools used for diagnosis and evaluation were also varied. However, most recommended ones were ADI-R, ADOS-G, and DISCO. 3. Treatment was largely divided into pharmacological intervention and non-pharmacological intervention. In some guideline, the interventions were divided into pediatric and adult. Most of the pharmacological interventions were not recommended due to lack of evidence, but in cases in which specific symptoms were aimed, they recommended to seek professional help. 4. In addition to interventions, each guideline referred to supportive interventions that may be helpful in the daily life of patients with ASD, which may need to be addressed in future clinical guidelines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: