自闭症与意向归因测验:用连环画进行非言语评价。

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Annals of General Psychiatry Pub Date : 2023-08-12 DOI:10.1186/s12991-023-00461-2
Ilenia Le Donne, Margherita Attanasio, Antony Bologna, Roberto Vagnetti, Francesco Masedu, Marco Valenti, Monica Mazza
{"title":"自闭症与意向归因测验:用连环画进行非言语评价。","authors":"Ilenia Le Donne, Margherita Attanasio, Antony Bologna, Roberto Vagnetti, Francesco Masedu, Marco Valenti, Monica Mazza","doi":"10.1186/s12991-023-00461-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and mentalization being two words often associated in the literature, the assessment of this ability in individuals with ASD in the clinical setting is still limited. Indeed, there are no standardized Theory of Mind (ToM) tests that are adaptable to different cognitive profiles, such as individuals with language poverty, and intellectual or memory impairments. This study proposes a non-verbal test (Intentions Attribution-Comic Strip Test; IA-CST) to evaluate the ability to infer the intentions of others, a basic component of ToM, in the clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In Study 1, the test was administered to 261 healthy individuals and we performed structural validation using Exploratory Graph Analysis. In Study 2, the final version of the test was administered to 32 individuals with ASD to assess the known group validity of the measure by comparing their scores with a sample of IQ-matched controls. Moreover, we performed logistic regression and ROC curve to preliminarily assess the diagnostic performance of the IA-CST.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IA-CST resulted in a 3-dimension measure with good structural stability. Group comparison indicated that the ASD group shows significantly lower performance in intention attribution but not in inferring causal consequences. The test demonstrated known group validity and that, preliminarily, it is suitable for implementation within the clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results support the IA-CST as a valid non-verbal task for evaluating intentions attribution in the clinical setting. Difficulties in ToM are early and relevant in ASD, so assessing these aspects is valuable for structuring individualized and evidence-based interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":7942,"journal":{"name":"Annals of General Psychiatry","volume":"22 1","pages":"29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10422844/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Autism and intention attribution test: a non-verbal evaluation with comic strips.\",\"authors\":\"Ilenia Le Donne, Margherita Attanasio, Antony Bologna, Roberto Vagnetti, Francesco Masedu, Marco Valenti, Monica Mazza\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12991-023-00461-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and mentalization being two words often associated in the literature, the assessment of this ability in individuals with ASD in the clinical setting is still limited. Indeed, there are no standardized Theory of Mind (ToM) tests that are adaptable to different cognitive profiles, such as individuals with language poverty, and intellectual or memory impairments. This study proposes a non-verbal test (Intentions Attribution-Comic Strip Test; IA-CST) to evaluate the ability to infer the intentions of others, a basic component of ToM, in the clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>In Study 1, the test was administered to 261 healthy individuals and we performed structural validation using Exploratory Graph Analysis. In Study 2, the final version of the test was administered to 32 individuals with ASD to assess the known group validity of the measure by comparing their scores with a sample of IQ-matched controls. Moreover, we performed logistic regression and ROC curve to preliminarily assess the diagnostic performance of the IA-CST.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The IA-CST resulted in a 3-dimension measure with good structural stability. Group comparison indicated that the ASD group shows significantly lower performance in intention attribution but not in inferring causal consequences. The test demonstrated known group validity and that, preliminarily, it is suitable for implementation within the clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results support the IA-CST as a valid non-verbal task for evaluating intentions attribution in the clinical setting. Difficulties in ToM are early and relevant in ASD, so assessing these aspects is valuable for structuring individualized and evidence-based interventions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of General Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10422844/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of General Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12991-023-00461-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of General Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12991-023-00461-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)和心智化(mentalization)这两个词在文献中经常被联系在一起,但在临床环境中对ASD患者这种能力的评估仍然有限。事实上,没有标准化的心智理论(ToM)测试可以适用于不同的认知特征,比如语言贫乏、智力或记忆障碍的个体。本研究提出一种非言语测验(意图归因-漫画测验;IA-CST)用于评估在临床环境中推断他人意图的能力,这是ToM的一个基本组成部分。方法:在研究1中,我们对261名健康个体进行测试,并使用探索性图分析进行结构验证。在研究2中,测试的最终版本对32名ASD患者进行了测试,通过将他们的得分与智商匹配的对照组样本进行比较,来评估该测试的已知群体有效性。通过logistic回归和ROC曲线对IA-CST的诊断效能进行初步评价。结果:IA-CST的三维测量结果具有良好的结构稳定性。组间比较表明,ASD组在意图归因上的表现明显较低,但在推断因果结果上无显著差异。该测试显示已知的组效度,初步适合在临床实践中实施。结论:本研究结果支持IA-CST作为评估临床意向归因的有效非言语任务。ToM的困难是早期的,与ASD相关,因此评估这些方面对于构建个性化和基于证据的干预措施是有价值的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Autism and intention attribution test: a non-verbal evaluation with comic strips.

Background: Despite autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and mentalization being two words often associated in the literature, the assessment of this ability in individuals with ASD in the clinical setting is still limited. Indeed, there are no standardized Theory of Mind (ToM) tests that are adaptable to different cognitive profiles, such as individuals with language poverty, and intellectual or memory impairments. This study proposes a non-verbal test (Intentions Attribution-Comic Strip Test; IA-CST) to evaluate the ability to infer the intentions of others, a basic component of ToM, in the clinical setting.

Method: In Study 1, the test was administered to 261 healthy individuals and we performed structural validation using Exploratory Graph Analysis. In Study 2, the final version of the test was administered to 32 individuals with ASD to assess the known group validity of the measure by comparing their scores with a sample of IQ-matched controls. Moreover, we performed logistic regression and ROC curve to preliminarily assess the diagnostic performance of the IA-CST.

Results: The IA-CST resulted in a 3-dimension measure with good structural stability. Group comparison indicated that the ASD group shows significantly lower performance in intention attribution but not in inferring causal consequences. The test demonstrated known group validity and that, preliminarily, it is suitable for implementation within the clinical practice.

Conclusions: The results support the IA-CST as a valid non-verbal task for evaluating intentions attribution in the clinical setting. Difficulties in ToM are early and relevant in ASD, so assessing these aspects is valuable for structuring individualized and evidence-based interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
2.70%
发文量
43
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of General Psychiatry considers manuscripts on all aspects of psychiatry, including neuroscience and psychological medicine. Both basic and clinical neuroscience contributions are encouraged. Annals of General Psychiatry emphasizes a biopsychosocial approach to illness and health and strongly supports and follows the principles of evidence-based medicine. As an open access journal, Annals of General Psychiatry facilitates the worldwide distribution of high quality psychiatry and mental health research. The journal considers submissions on a wide range of topics including, but not limited to, psychopharmacology, forensic psychiatry, psychotic disorders, psychiatric genetics, and mood and anxiety disorders.
期刊最新文献
Psychotropic drug-induced adverse drug reactions in 462,661 psychiatric inpatients in relation to age: results from a German drug surveillance program from 1993-2016. Clinical patterns of metabolic syndrome in young, clinically stable, olanzapine-exposed patients with schizophrenia. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) as treatment for nicotine cessation in psychiatric populations: a systematic review. A pooled analysis of the efficacy of sertraline in women, with a focus on those of childbearing age. Treatment satisfaction and effectiveness of Lurasidone on quality of life and functioning in adult patients with schizophrenia in the real-world Italian clinical practice: a prospective 3-month observational study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1