Centre d'Information et de documentation du CRA Rhône-Alpes
CRA
Informations pratiques
-
Adresse
Centre d'information et de documentation
du CRA Rhône-Alpes
Centre Hospitalier le Vinatier
bât 211
95, Bd Pinel
69678 Bron CedexHoraires
Lundi au Vendredi
9h00-12h00 13h30-16h00Contact
Tél: +33(0)4 37 91 54 65
Mail
Fax: +33(0)4 37 91 54 37
-
Résultat de la recherche
2 recherche sur le mot-clé 'Diagnosis disclosure'
Affiner la recherche Générer le flux rss de la recherche
Partager le résultat de cette recherche Faire une suggestion
The Feedback Session of an Autism Assessment: A Scoping Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations / Ellen PATTISON in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 52-4 (April 2022)
[article]
Titre : The Feedback Session of an Autism Assessment: A Scoping Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Ellen PATTISON, Auteur ; Alexandra URE, Auteur ; Sharon R. MITTIGA, Auteur ; Katrina WILLIAMS, Auteur ; Nerelie C. FREEMAN, Auteur Article en page(s) : p.1821-1840 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : Autism Spectrum Disorder/diagnosis/therapy Autistic Disorder/diagnosis/therapy Feedback Humans Assessment Autism Diagnosis disclosure Guidelines Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : This review aimed to assess the quality and content of recommendations for delivering an autism diagnosis, published internationally within clinical practice guidelines. Seventeen relevant guidelines were identified. When methodological information was provided, recommendations for feedback were predominantly formed through consensus. Recommendations consistently included who should attend feedback, the timing and mode of delivery, the clinician's manner, and what should be discussed and/or included in an accompanying report. Specific recommendations were not consistent however, and a number of gaps were identified, such as the inclusion of educators and educational specific recommendations. Although individual variation is necessary for autism diagnosis disclosure, agreement on minimum standards of practice is warranted. Further investigation is required to establish best practice. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05067-9 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=476
in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders > 52-4 (April 2022) . - p.1821-1840[article] The Feedback Session of an Autism Assessment: A Scoping Review of Clinical Practice Guideline Recommendations [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Ellen PATTISON, Auteur ; Alexandra URE, Auteur ; Sharon R. MITTIGA, Auteur ; Katrina WILLIAMS, Auteur ; Nerelie C. FREEMAN, Auteur . - p.1821-1840.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders > 52-4 (April 2022) . - p.1821-1840
Mots-clés : Autism Spectrum Disorder/diagnosis/therapy Autistic Disorder/diagnosis/therapy Feedback Humans Assessment Autism Diagnosis disclosure Guidelines Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : This review aimed to assess the quality and content of recommendations for delivering an autism diagnosis, published internationally within clinical practice guidelines. Seventeen relevant guidelines were identified. When methodological information was provided, recommendations for feedback were predominantly formed through consensus. Recommendations consistently included who should attend feedback, the timing and mode of delivery, the clinician's manner, and what should be discussed and/or included in an accompanying report. Specific recommendations were not consistent however, and a number of gaps were identified, such as the inclusion of educators and educational specific recommendations. Although individual variation is necessary for autism diagnosis disclosure, agreement on minimum standards of practice is warranted. Further investigation is required to establish best practice. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05067-9 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=476 Brief report: Perceived credibility of autistic witnesses and the effect of diagnostic information on credibility ratings / Katie MARAS in Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 68 (December 2019)
[article]
Titre : Brief report: Perceived credibility of autistic witnesses and the effect of diagnostic information on credibility ratings Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Katie MARAS, Auteur ; Laura CRANE, Auteur ; Ian WALKER, Auteur ; Amina MEMON, Auteur Article en page(s) : p.101442 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : Autism spectrum disorder Witness Credibility Diagnosis disclosure Interviewing Jurors Perceptions Criminal justice Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background People with autism spectrum disorder (henceforth, autism) exhibit a number of atypical behaviours that may be relied upon by jurors when making judgements about their credibility as witnesses. The current study aimed to: (1) examine whether autistic witnesses were perceived as less credible than typically developing (TD) witnesses, irrespective of the number of correct details they reported; and (2) determine whether mock jurors’ credibility ratings of autistic witnesses improved if they were aware of their autism diagnoses and were provided with information about autism. Method One-hundred-and-twenty-five mock jurors rated the credibility of video testimony of 17 autistic and 17 TD witness participants recalling an event. Half of the juror participants were informed that some of the witnesses were autistic and were provided with information about autism; the other half received no information about witnesses’ diagnoses. Results Contrary to predictions, autistic witnesses were seen to be as credible as TD witnesses when no information about their diagnosis was provided. However, when jurors were informed that a witness was autistic and were also provided with further information about autism, they were rated as slightly more credible than TD witnesses. Credibility ratings were only predicted by jurors’ prior knowledge/experience of autism when they were explicitly informed of witnesses’ autism diagnoses. Conclusions These results indicate that disclosing one’s autism diagnosis (alongside further information about autism) may result in a positive bias in terms of witnesses’ perceived credibility. Implications for jury instructions and future research directions are discussed. En ligne : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.101442 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=408
in Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders > 68 (December 2019) . - p.101442[article] Brief report: Perceived credibility of autistic witnesses and the effect of diagnostic information on credibility ratings [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Katie MARAS, Auteur ; Laura CRANE, Auteur ; Ian WALKER, Auteur ; Amina MEMON, Auteur . - p.101442.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders > 68 (December 2019) . - p.101442
Mots-clés : Autism spectrum disorder Witness Credibility Diagnosis disclosure Interviewing Jurors Perceptions Criminal justice Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : Background People with autism spectrum disorder (henceforth, autism) exhibit a number of atypical behaviours that may be relied upon by jurors when making judgements about their credibility as witnesses. The current study aimed to: (1) examine whether autistic witnesses were perceived as less credible than typically developing (TD) witnesses, irrespective of the number of correct details they reported; and (2) determine whether mock jurors’ credibility ratings of autistic witnesses improved if they were aware of their autism diagnoses and were provided with information about autism. Method One-hundred-and-twenty-five mock jurors rated the credibility of video testimony of 17 autistic and 17 TD witness participants recalling an event. Half of the juror participants were informed that some of the witnesses were autistic and were provided with information about autism; the other half received no information about witnesses’ diagnoses. Results Contrary to predictions, autistic witnesses were seen to be as credible as TD witnesses when no information about their diagnosis was provided. However, when jurors were informed that a witness was autistic and were also provided with further information about autism, they were rated as slightly more credible than TD witnesses. Credibility ratings were only predicted by jurors’ prior knowledge/experience of autism when they were explicitly informed of witnesses’ autism diagnoses. Conclusions These results indicate that disclosing one’s autism diagnosis (alongside further information about autism) may result in a positive bias in terms of witnesses’ perceived credibility. Implications for jury instructions and future research directions are discussed. En ligne : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2019.101442 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=408