Talk:High-functioning autism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Disability (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon High-functioning autism is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Person first language[edit]

Use "people friendly", "people first" language. "autistic people" NOT "people with autism". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.55.199.127 (talk) 03:57, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

You've got it backwards: "people with autism" not "autistic people". But for a different perspective ... JIMp talk·cont 14:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

older entries[edit]

This is horrendous and needs attention badly. I'll see what I can do tomorrow. FatherGuidoSarducci

If you or someone else does (and keeps the no original research violating correlations), see my comment here on personality correlations (etc...). -- Tomorrow came and went 24.22.227.53 19:31, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

err i think the article is inacurate in many ways and needs work. 1 i am a person with aspbergrs (correction-asperger!) syndrome and i CANNOT function near normal in soceity. to make a absolute statement that every high end autistic can is a really terrible thing to say and isa stright out LIE for one i have dysgraphya and a few other learning disabilitys accoiated with aspebergrs that makes working and social functions very hard. please read about high end autism before you write anything and take it all into account- thank you

The term Asperger syndrome is generally used to refer to those who can function in society -- if one has multiple diagnoses, this changes the situation. Other learning disabilities may be associated with Aspberger's, but they are not linked to it directly. Poesian 20:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe several points need to be taken into account here. 1-'Neurotypicals' with autistic traits are not high-functioning autistics. 2-The use of labels such as Asperger Syndrome vs Kanner Autism are not standardised. As in the above paragraph, care must be taken to clarify that not all aspies lack functioning problems, for example. 3-Controversies_about_functioning_labels_in_the_autism_spectrum should be more than a 'see-also'; this article is based on assumptions which it challenges. --196.25.255.210 21:10, 27 December 2005 (UTC) (asperger's and hfa are different things! pull it together!I am hfa marked by serius speech delay!) It should be noted that recent research, as quoted in Time Magazine shows that many patients with low-level autism are not, in fact, mentally retarded. Through therapy, advances in communication are being made, allowing patients to "speak" through an interpreter. Oftentimes, this "speech" shows a high level of comprehension and intellect.

So much conflation, so little time[edit]

This article conflates high-functioning autism with Asperger's syndrome in the introduction (when this is far from the consensus) and later distinguishes HFA from "autism," where I take autism to mean low-functioning autism. In truth, high-functioning autism is a diagnosis of autistic disorder (DSM-IV-TR) or childhood autism (ICD-10) without mental retardation (an otherwise relatively high level of adapative functioning).

Also, this article is heavy on speculation and personal opinion (like the MBTI stuff) and needs to cite more professional, scholarly sources.--NeantHumain 22:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

This is not a joust at content or POV so much as form and substance here.

This statement:

“HFA is sometimes also known as Asperger syndrome, however this is a misnomer.”

is in conflict with

“Experts disagree on whether or not high-functioning autism and Asperger's syndrome are synonymous, but both, by definition, require a relatively high level of adaptive functioning in comparison to low-functioning autism.”
1. It is a misnomer but experts have not reached consensus and they may or may not be defined the same way?
2. The DSM and the ICD have this categorization? As you say, it does not.

This statement could lead somewhere but we need to know where the debate is taking place:

"The difference is that in Asperger syndrome there is no linguistic delay however there is in HFA.”

Calling this a misnomer at the start presents problems. The opening statement needs to be revised to reflect the disputed scientific view, not an undisputed viewpoint.

Another small glitch:

"In everyday terms, those who are affected by it may be understood as being "eccentrics", "nerds", "geeks", or termed a "little professor" or boffin.

This is also the term Hans Asperger used, ‘little professors.’

It is entirely possible that the references listed in the section below the article could be used to muster the needed citations. With a balanced rewrite to reflect the POV issues at hand (all too common in science and that is as it should be), this could be a valuable addition to the Wikipedia “Autism” collection. Hope you find time in the near future. Malangthon 00:25, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

So much of not enough

I think what ever is not redundant here (much of it simply overlaps with the Autism article for example), should be given sources and then placed in the Autism or Asperger's article. I went through hundreds of documents on PubMed and this is a very loose term with very little if any identified criteria--at this time. But the article begins by saying this is not a real condition and has no formal definition but then it just goes on as if the veracity was established- This could be a disambiguation, it could be the focus of a section in another article to demonstrate disputes in the field, but it is not an entire article. Malangthon 07:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

The opening line has been stripped of everything that can not be substantiated or is simply incorrect. Here is what I deleted: "People with the diagnosis of high-functioning autism still experience substantial and pervasive difficulties in society. HFA is a developmental disorder similar to Asperger's Syndrome, however, HFA is usually a more pronounced disorder, particularly because of HFA's congruent language delay. "

Basically, a high-functioning autistic person is autistic and has a higher I.Q. than autistic people with lower I.Q.s. That is it. They are not retarded, not cognitively challenged. It is a part of the diagnosis and is not a separate aspect or disorder. Until someone can come up with reputable sources (and not commercial vendors trying to make a buck no matter how altruistic), this really needs a serious rewrite. Malangthon 20:11, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

So Close

The citation for this paragraph "There is some evidence that the label has wrongly become a catch-all diagnosis for badly-behaved children. In 2000 in the UK, the lead clinician and autism specialist at Northgate and Prudhoe NHS Trust in Morpeth, Dr Tom Berney, published a paper commenting on this. He wrote in the prestigious British Journal of Psychiatry:- "There is a risk of the diagnosis of autism being extended to include anyone whose odd and troublesome personality does not readily fit some other category. Such over-inclusion is likely to devalue the diagnosis to a meaningless label."[citation needed]"

Lacked

  • Title of paper
  • Volume and number of journal issue
  • Page--it is a quote

Malangthon 20:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Templates[edit]

Added them to sections since putting them out for statments was just tedious. The issue is there, the need for a short article is demonstrable, but this is not it. Malangthon 00:43, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

DSM IV GAF Scale[edit]

The GAF scale is the 5th diagnostic axis of the DSM-IV. GAF means Global assessment of Functioning. A broad functioning level label could be derived from that, maybe also combined with IQ. Maybe even add more tiers (VHFA, HFA, MFA, LFA, VLFA). VHFA would be GAF 51-70, IQ 92.5+ (>-0.5 SD) HFA would be GAF 41-60, IQ 77.5-92.5 (-1.5 to -0.5 SD). MFA would be GAF 31-50, IQ 55-77.5 (-3 to -1.5 SD). LFA would be GAF 21-40, IQ 40-55 (-4 to -3 SD). VLFA would be GAF <31, IQ<40 (<-4 SD). I made the GAF ranges intentially overlap as cognitive impairment can add to the decline of functioning on top of the base autistic impairments.

IQ is a mean of 100 and a Standard Deviation of 15. Poeople who are sensory Kinesthetic dominant have an unfair disadvantage with the WAIS-R. Here's the GAF Scale:

  • 91-100 Superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life's problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many qualities. No symptoms.
  • 90-81 Absent or minimal symptoms, good functioning in all areas, interested and involved in a wide range of activities, socially effective, generally satisfied with life, no more than everyday problems or concerns.
  • 80-71 If symptoms are present they are transient and expectable reactions to psychosocial stresses; no more than slight impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning.
  • 70-61 Some mild symptoms OR some difficulty in social, occupational, or school functioning, but generally functioning pretty well, has some meaningful interpersonal relationships.
  • 60-51 Moderate symptoms OR any moderate difficulty in social, occupational, or school functioning.
  • 50-41 Serious symptoms OR any serious impairment in social, occupational, or school functioning.
  • 40-31 Some impairment in reality testing or communication OR major impairment in several areas, such as work or school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood.
  • 30-21 Behavior is considered influenced by delusions or hallucinations OR serious impairment in communications or judgment OR inability to function in all areas.
  • 20-11 Some danger or hurting self or others OR occasionally fails to maintain minimal personal hygiene OR gross impairment in communication.
  • 10-1 Persistent danger of severely hurting self or others OR persistent inability to maintain minimum personal hygiene OR serious suicidal act with clear expectation of death.
  • 0 Not enough information available to provide GAF--GreatInca 20:23, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Benefits section[edit]

Does anyone have, well, any research at all demonstrating these benefits (particularly correlation with honesty or problem solving, and so on), or can this section simply be deleted? Never mind original research, I'm not seeing any research there at all. Jon R W 03:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Asperger or HFA[edit]

WhatAmIDoing removed the failed verification tag here; the article is clearly discussing Asperger as a form of autism, not HFA. Pls explain? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:37, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Uncited essay removed from "Social aspects"[edit]

Children with HFA may appear somewhat removed or dissociated or dreamy at times, especially when in sensory overload or from a perception of extreme social pressure. They may make little eye contact, leading others to conclude that they are shy, uninterested or evasive.

As with people elsewhere on the autistic spectrum transitioning from one activity to another can be highly stressful, especially unpredictable changes. Because of this, people with high-functioning autism generally prefer a scheduled routine and order from a very young age. Many high-functioning autistic children use daily schedules to minimize anxiety, and often incorporate structure into their lives themselves. They may, for example, write an alphabetized index of their comic book collection, or they may stick to a limited wardrobe.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Uncited essay removed from "Asociated difficulties"[edit]

People may label HFA people as "oddballs" or worse, and HFA people can easily become the target of bullying. This can be especially true from primary school through the late teens. Young, intelligent HFA people usually do best by seeking out the company of their intellectual peers or by joining hobby groups, while avoiding their age-group peers. Exposure to an age equivalent peer group within the autism spectrum on a regular basis can be especially beneficial.

Attending social and business events to network is also proven to play a crucial role in job hunting, but events such as these are the type that HFA people usually avoid due to their unease with the complex social interactions required. Difficulties with such pre-employment factors may contribute to comparative poverty, although intelligent HFA adults can usually find a good job if they can specialise in their area of interest. Once in a good job, however, their talents may lead to promotion and they may find themselves in a new job description that does not fit their personality.

Some may have minor to moderate difficulty with motor skills and co-ordination. This may manifest itself as mere clumsiness or awkwardness but in some instances can be found at a level where the child is a danger to themselves (this is especially true when younger), but may manifest itself in adulthood by "bumping into walls" and doors or other people without intention. Some may also nurture a complex habitual movement (called stereotypy) at which they become adept, for example, pen spinning, while otherwise being prone to clumsiness. These difficulties can be overcome through sensory integration therapy.

They do not necessarily lack empathy (although they may have difficulty expressing it), and can thus enjoy films and stories with emotional content. Some may gain the bulk of their insight into why people behave the way they do through watching movies that provide a forceful and musically-cued "capsule lesson" in human emotions (e.g. melodramas).

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:05, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed from "Characteristics", not about HFA[edit]

Nevertheless they are capable of social reasoning. Children with autism can understand stereotypes, social roles and other forms of social reasoning. Many examples include understanding the role of cashier in a supermarket and locking the doors when in certain neighborhoods.[1]

Source makes no mention of HFA, is about autism in general, not specific to HFA. Also, should be sourced to PMID 17580071 not the media. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:41, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Generally, there are difficulties with social interaction. This might not adversely affect their ability to interact with others on a day-to-day basis at a basic working level, although they may be seen as being overly serious or earnest, and as being without any "small talk" in conversation. In many instances though, these individuals have such severe social delays and difficulties that interaction within a "normal" social setting can be severely hampered. Although Tristan Lavender of Leiden Universiteit says Autistic children may be more emotional than most people think. She believes Autistic children are capable of listening to conversation and finding out how they feel through words even if they happen to not exchange words with the people having the conversation.[2]

Sourced to a personal website that never mentions HFA, is about autism in general. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

They may have difficulty initiating love and friendship relationships due to less developed social skills, a perceived inexpressiveness, and a difficulty recognizing subtle and nonverbal messages from others. One method HFA children and adults use to get around this is communicating through email and the internet. Many of the children and adults claim it is one way that helps them bypass the mass amount of social skills they feel are needed to interact with the average person. They also claim it allows them to communicate at their own pace.[3]

Source is about autism in general, doesn't mention HFA, and topic is already covered at Sociological and cultural aspects of autism. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:47, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Given the proven crucial role of body language in job interviews, lack of eye contact in such a situation may be perceived by potential employers as indicating that the candidate is "not telling the truth" or "uninterested in the job" (which is actually a myth[4]), and thus lead to a cumulative difficulty in finding employment. A study from Nottingham University says that autistic chidlren actually can interpret other peoples mental states by looking at their eyes. In the study conducted the autistic participants were actually able to read animated facial expressions. The researchers say that the tests done on children with this condtion using still pictures were actually inaccurate and that the suggested alterantive to better determine the capabalitites of these children is using moving images.[5]

No mention of HFA in the source, also should cite actual study not press release, and first sentence is original research unrelated to this article. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Autistic people are prone to commit social faux pas because of an inability to predict others' reactions. They may also neglect social niceties like knocking or returning a greeting. Similarly, they may be overly trusting or paranoid of strangers. It may be best summed up as an inability to understand/perceive the intent or emotional wants and needs of others around them. Licensed psychologist Scott Bellini, of Indiana University, has demonstrated that autistic children not only want to develop social relationships, but are actually able to build relationships with peers through social skills training.[6] People with autism can also be taught how society works according to a study conducted at the university of Haifa, which found that children with autism can use virtual reality simulations to learn about the complex rules of society.[7]

Neither source mentions HFA, not about HFA, about autism, and remove vanity entry (we should write about the research, not the researchers). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:54, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed from "Epidemiology"[edit]

HFA affects far more males than females. The ASD sex ratio, which averages 4.3:1, is greatly modified by cognitive impairment: it may be close to 2:1 with mental retardation and more than 5.5:1 for HFA.[8]

Not about HFA, about ASD, covered elsewhere. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Can you at least add all the information you removed to the autism section?. I have autism and KI find the page lacking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.78.52 (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Please.[edit]

I am a confirmed HFA person. despite this article being a stub, it deserves much more attention. If possible, please make additional research to expand it, for the sake of me. -pf99 75.166.127.59 (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Unknown name added?[edit]

Who is Christain Chandler? His name appears to link to a (now dead) user page. Someone kid adding his own name to pages?

There was a vandal who kept on adding that name to various autism-related pages. Where did you see it? I don't see it on any live pages. -- Soap Talk/Contributions 03:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Chandler's a rather infamous guy (he's a manchild, but that's just my opinion) on the Internet. He's not particularly noteworthy but he did write a gigantic autobiography on his userpage when he made an account here. Sky Prower 14:01, 14 October 2009

Copyediting required for latest edit[edit]

The parts of the article added by user Amsm141 seem to be in need of some copyediting for coherence. In particular, in the sentence

"It tends to describe people who have many or all of the symptoms of autism but did not develop language typically."

I presume that "typically" should read "atypically." The last sentence in the article listing autistic behaviors also requires editing for clarity.

Copyright problem removed[edit]

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://autism.about.com/od/whatisautism/f/whatishfa.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Colin°Talk 21:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 August 2012[edit]

A person with high-functioning autism usually has average or above average intelligence. The differences from other forms of autism have led many psychiatrists to consider high-functioning autism as similar to or the same as Asperger's syndrome. However, the amount of overlap between HFA and Asperger syndrome is disputed. Some researchers argue that the two are distinct diagnostic entities, others argue that they are indistinguishable.

Though High functioning autism is not an official diagnostic term, it may be used as such. It tends to describe people who have many or all of the symptoms of autism but did not develop language typically.

Generally speaking, doctors prefer to group people with autistic symptoms into discrete diagnostic categories. Rett syndrome and Fragile X syndrome are relatively clearcut disorders, and thus are likely to be correctly diagnosed. Classic autism is also fairly clearcut: Children with classic autism are usually non-verbal, unengaged, and unable to perform well on standard diagnostic tests.

Unlike people with other forms of autism, people with high-functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome want to be involved with others. They simply don't know how to go about it. They may not be able to understand others' emotions. They may not read facial expressions or body language well. As a result, they may be teased and often feel like social outcasts. The unwanted social isolation can lead to anxiety and depression.

Children with classic autism are usually non-verbal, unengaged, and unable to perform well on standard diagnostic tests; however people with high functioning still also demonstrate clearly autistic behaviors. Examples can include, depending upon their age: use of meaningful language, reading, writing, doing mathematics, showing affection, completing daily tasks; but can't hold eye contact, maintain a conversation, engage in play, pick up on social cues, etc. What is the correct diagnosis for such a child? Is it Pervasive Developmental Not Otherwise Specified" (PDD-NOS)? Asperger syndrome? High functioning autism?

PDD-NOS is a catch-all diagnosis. Often understood to mean the same thing as "high functioning autistic," it really incorporates individuals at all function levels whose symptoms don't fully correlate with classic autism. So a PDD-NOS diagnosis may provide some information to parents and teachers but cannot guide treatment.

One useful explanation of the difference between Asperger syndrome and high functioning autism comes from the National Autism Society in the UK. Here's what it says:

  • Both people with High-functioning autism and Asperger syndrome are affected by the triad of impairments common to all people with autism.
  • Both groups are likely to be of average or above average intelligence.
  • The debate as to whether we need two diagnostic terms is ongoing. However, there may be features such as age of onset and motor skill deficits which differentiate the two conditions
  • Although it is frustrating to be given a diagnosis which has yet to be clearly defined it is worth remembering that the fundamental presentation of the two conditions is largely the same. This means that treatments, therapies and educational approaches should also be largely similar. At the same time, all people with autism or Asperger syndrome are unique and have their own special skills and abilities. These deserve as much recognition as the areas they have difficulty in.


Citation: Disabled World News (2010-12-04) - Information regarding High Functioning Autism (HFA) in children and adults with autism spectrum disorders: http://www.disabled-world.com/health/neurology/autism/hfa.php#ixzz253r24Lhv

69.227.85.1 (talk) 19:59, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Assuming you want the above added to the article—sorry, but it appears to have been lifted verbatim from somewhere else on the Web (>90 Google hits). Even assuming the attribution you provided is to the original source, we cannot add lengthy passages of material unless it carries a compatible license. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for more information. Rivertorch (talk) 06:42, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 28 November 2012[edit]

I'd like to add some things to this article translated from the Dutch version (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoogfunctionerend_autisme )

this is what I want to add;

Attributes with which people with High-Functioning Autism separate theirselves from people with Asperger syndrome are amongst others the following:

  • A lower verbal intelligence quotient
  • Better visual-spatial skills (higher implementing-IQ) than people with Asperger syndrome
  • Less deviating locomotion than people with Asperger syndrome
  • People with Asperger syndrome are better at empathizing with another
  • People with HFA more often have problems functioning indepedently
  • Curiousity and interest for many different things, in contrast to people with Asperger syndrome

SimonKok (talk) 10:44, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

A huge problem is the lack of sources! You need to find reliable sources for all of these differences before we can add them to the article. (I hope you don't mind I edited a bit in your text). Lova Falk talk 11:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


Sources, notes and/or references: Bronnen, noten en/of referenties T. Attwood, Is There a Difference Between Asperger's Syndrome and High Functioning Autism? (link: [9]) Nicole J. Rinehart, John L. Bradshaw, Avril V. Brereton en Bruce J. Tonge, Lateralization in Individuals with High-Functioning Autism and Asperger's Disorder: A Frontostriatal Model, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2002 (link: [10]) Mazefsky CA, Oswald DP, Emotion Perception in Asperger's Syndrome and High-functioning Autism: The Importance of Diagnostic Criteria and Cue Intensity. J Autism Dev Disord. 16 dec. 2006 (link: [11]) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonKok (talkcontribs) 12:51, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Please go ahead and edit. Veel succes! Lova Falk talk 14:16, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm now allowed to (sadface) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonKok (talkcontribs) 22:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess you mean you are not allowed to? Once your account is four days old and you have made ten edits, you can. Until then, you can suggest the edits you wish to make here on the talk page, and we other editors can insert them for you (if you have good sources etc etc). Lova Falk talk 20:12, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I did mean that. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonKok (talkcontribs) 21:43, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Edit number four! Six more to go. But I added your text for you. Lova Falk talk 11:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done

course assignment[edit]

This topic is being edited as an assignment in an undergraduate neurobiology course. The course is participating in the Wikipedia Education Program. The revised article will be posted by March 22, 2013. Please leave any comments on sources or information you would like to see on this topic. Dotterson (talk) 05:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Cool. Please be sure to read WP:MEDRS and rely only on secondary sources. Good luck, and you might want to propose edits here first. Dbrodbeck (talk) 13:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
The first draft of the article has been posted. If reviewers have any suggestions, please let us know and we will make the appropriate changes to the article. Thank you!CK3501 (talk) 16:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Secondary Review[edit]

The article seemed like it was written and structured well. I would suggest adding a few more wikilinks to the article (particularly in the first half of the article). The treatment and management section I believe can be put together into one section. As well the 4th reference is not cited properly in the references section. Overall, it was a well written and informative article. Daner33 (talk) 01:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Secondary Review[edit]

This article looks and sounds like a real Wikiarticle. Great job guys. I would like to add that you should probably link a lot more of your words to other pages. To improve the article, you may also want to add a small history section of the disease. This grounds why the disease is important to study. If you bring up a past case and what that person was specifically living with it will make the reader that much more interested in continuing to read what has changed from then to now in treatments. Linzjay (talk) 21:41, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Secondary Review[edit]

As the other secondary reviewers pointed out, the first thing I would make sure to do is add more Wikilinks. This will really improve the quality of the article. In the introduction, I would change the wording of this sentence "Individuals with HFA or Asperger syndrome exhibit deficits in areas of communication, emotion recognition and expression, and social interaction" to read "Individuals with HFA or Asperger syndrome exhibit deficits in areas of social interaction, including communication as well as emotion recognition and expression." Other than this, I did not recognize any grammatical errors. Overall, very well written! Good job! Bzastrow (talk) 17:58, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Secondary Review[edit]

This is a well written article that is broad in coverage and cohesive, despite the lack of information available out there and the high level of debate surrounding your topic. This article is well written and appears as though it came from one author, which means that you guys did a great job synthesizing your information and keeping it stylistically uniform. There seems to be a good amount of links to other Wikipedia pages, as well as proper incorporation and citation of your secondary research sources. One thing I might consider adding, which seems to be a common challenge for many groups, is an image. Perhaps you could create a graph in Excel that shows the percentage of patients with high-functioning autism as opposed to standard autism diagnosis, or a Venn diagram type image that compares and contrasts the features of high-functioning autism verus standard autism. This seems to be a hot topic in in the Wikipedia community given all the activity on the talk page, so I'm sure that your group's edits won't be the last for this the page. Having said that, your group has created a very well written article without injecting bias or opinion into this highly debated topic that will serve as a great baseline for future additions. Noahgford (talk) 20:57, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Secondary Review[edit]

Overall the article is very well written. There were no grammatical errors that I saw. Also as other reviewers suggested I also believe that you should link some of your words to other pages (if applicable), this would make it easier for the readers to be able to understand some of the terms used more clearly in order to better understand the disease. I really liked the “characterization” section of the article. It is very well written and uses easy terminology, which can be understood by most readers. Overall the article is written very cohesively and provides a lot of in dept information about the disease. --Tayaba.ahmad (talk) 06:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC) tayaba.ahmad

Primary Review[edit]

For the most part, this article is very well done! Before going over the 6 criteria, a few quick points. -In the opening sentence, would it possibly be a little more sensitive to use the phrase "people with autism" as opposed to "autistic people"? It looks like this is already taken care of in the rest of the article. -Several other psychiatric/social disorder pages include a section on "society and culture", often with sections on notable cases and advocacy. I would imagine that this would be a section that could be added to this page without too much difficulty, if someone is interested in doing that.

1) Well written - For the most part, the article is very well done in terms of grammar and structure. It comes across just like any wikipedia page should. The information is presented clearly, and in a concise manner. Just a few notes here.

-The second to last bulletpoint under "Characterization" should probably be worded differently. On the last bulletpoint, compared to what? Other forms of Autism?
-When talking about the link between HFA, OCD and serotonin, you could potentially mention what the link is.
-Under "Cause", I don't believe that grey matter is typically capitalized.

2) Verifiable with no original research - I believe that the study by Scheeren, Koot, and Beeger (2012) is original research. Is there a review or meta-analysis that might contain a critique or analysis of this paper? The paper by Atwood is marked as being possibly unreliable. Do you guys know why that may be? Could you possibly find it in a peer reviewed journal as opposed to just an online pdf? I think that would give it a lot more credibility.

3) Broad in coverage - From what I can tell, a broader understanding of HFA is still being developed. Given that, it seems like the article covers enough points to give the reader a good idea about what is currently known about it.

4) Neutral - I'm not sure if the "people with autism" vs. "autistic people" thing falls under here, but I would just take a look into that a little bit. Other than that, everything looks good.

5) Stable - you do not need to evaluate this criteria.

6) Illustrated - Personally, I have no idea where an image would go here. The only thing that I can think of would be if you did decide to add a "notable cases" section, you could have a picture or two under there. Other than that, I have no ideas.

I looked over the review "Psychiatric comorbidities in asperger syndrome and high functioning autism: diagnostic challenges" by Mazzone, Ruta, and Reale. I just had a couple of notes I wanted to ask you guys about. In the section "Characterization" in your article, you state (referencing the review), "Some of these symptoms include depression, bipolar disorder, and obsessive compulsive disorder." Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that HFA has similarities to these disorders, since each of those are disorders themselves, and generally not symptoms of disorders. I think it could also be good to mention the similarities in brain region functioning between HFA and OCD/ anxiety disorders. It is talked about in the review right after the part about serotonin similarities under "internalizing disorders". Finally, would it possibly be a good idea to include something about the section "The role of the environment in the manifestation of psychiatric disorders in AS/HFA"? I think it would supplement the information about serotonin similarities pretty well. Other than that I think you guys did a good job of getting the main point of the article across- that HFA shares a lot of similarities, and is often comorbid with several other disorders. The review is a secondary source, and meets the criteria for use on wikipedia. Nice job! Xc stallion92 (talk) 14:54, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions Xc stallion92! The following changes were made to the article:
  • The wording of the first sentence of the article was changed to be more sensitively phrased.
  • The last bullet point of characterization was modified.
  • The language of "symptoms" under characterization was clarified for the particular sentence pointed out in your review.
  • The capitalization of grey matter was changed.
  • The primary article was replaced by a secondary article containing the same study in review.

The changes not made and reasoning behind not making the changes at this time follow:

  • The possibility of creating a Society and Culture or Environmental Role heading was considered to be too wide for the scope of our project. These are currently addressed in the Autism or Asperger syndrome pages though such subheadings may become necessary as more research concerning specifically HFA is published.
  • In reference to further explaining the physical link between HFA and OCD via serotonin, please note that the connection between HFA and OCD is a correlation but does not necessarily imply causation as of yet. No changes can be made at this time.

We are continuing to look into and hoping to soon resolve the issue with the Atwood Article. Thank you for your valuable suggestions! CK3501 (talk) 17:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Primary Review[edit]

This is a good article that provided enough information to understand High-Functioning autism without becoming overwhelmed. In each section the writing was very clear and easy to follow. Someone without a scientific background could easily understand this article. There were no apparent spelling or grammatical errors. However, I also agree that referring to individuals with autism as "autistic" is a bit harsh. I would suggest rewording this phrase.

The list of sources are all secondary and they are cited according to the layout style guideline. Information such as direct quotes and statistics are properly referenced using in-line citations.

This article definitely addresses the main aspects of the topic. There is also never a point in the article that goes into unnecessary detail. However, the structural abnormalities that accompany HFA would seem to fall under the characterization category. I believe Exploring valid theories on the cause of HFA would be a nice addition. The source, "Autism and Aspergers syndrome: an overview" briefly discussed the belief that some vaccinations and diseases may lead to autism.

There are no viewpoints unequally represented in this article. It seems that perspectives are presented without bias.

This article is also very stable, I have yet to see an edit war.

There are no images provided for this article. I understand that HFA cannot necessarily be represented with an image. However, maybe providing an image of the structural abnormalities characteristic of HFA or an MRI brain scan of an individual with this syndrome.

I reviewed the article "Autism and Aspergers syndrome: an overview." This is an acceptable secondary source. Although this source provided very little information on HFA, the information that was provided was cited correctly. The source discussed how the definition of autism has been broaden to include HFA and Aspergers syndrome. Though, there is no clear definition of HFA. The authors briefly mentioned this but there was no explanation of why there is confusion and debate about HFA. Exploring how the distinction of HFA from traditional forms of autism makes it difficult to characterize, should be included in the article. This source also discussed the demographic typically affected by autism and how often it occurs in society. This was mentioned in the Characterization category but including theories the source used to explain why HFA is higher in male's would be a nice addition. Lastly, I think the authors should explicitly state that HFA is not accompanied by mental deficiency's. SewellBio (talk) 23:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


Hi SewellBio!

Thanks for your suggestions. In response to your suggestion to change the structural abnormalities from the “causes” section to “characterization”, we believe that the structural abnormalities that accompany HFA (such as abnormalities in the amygdala, superiora temporal sculcus, fusiform, gyrus area and orbitofrontal cortex) could be under “characterization” or “causes”. We decided to keep this under causes because there is little known about what causes HFA. Structural abnormalities in the brain regions mentioned above have been revealed in individuals with HFA compared to typically developing individuals, which indicates that structural abnormalities in specific regions might be a cause of HFA.

We decided not to add a paragraph talking about the possibility that autism is an x-linked genetic condition- making males more vulnerable. The article, “Autism and Asperger syndrome: an overview”, says, there is limited data for making any conclusions at this point so there is no reliable information to back this point. While HFA is not accompanied by mental deficiencies, the article, “autism and Aspergers syndrome: An overview”, states, that 60-70% of individuals with autism have mental retardations. We decided to add this fact to our article like you suggested.

You suggested exploring that the distinction of HFA from traditional forms of autism makes it difficult to characterize should be included. We added another way to characterize HFA from the traditional autism spectrum (above) and we also mentioned this in the first paragraph of the article. We said, “the distinction between HFA and the traditional forms of autism is that people with HFA have an IQ>70.”

You also suggested exploring valid theories on the cause of HFA as an addition. We added a theory on a possible cause of autism. “There is a belief that some vaccinations, such as the MMR or measles/mumps vaccine, may cause autism. This has caused some parents to take their children off of the vaccines and as a result, these diseases can lead to mental retardation or death. The claim that some vaccinations cause autism has not been proven through multiple, large-scale studies conducted in Japan, the United States, and others.”

Thank you for your feedback! We appreciated it and made many of the changes you suggested to make our article better. Gfolan (talk) 04:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Primary Review[edit]

This article is of fairly standard quality and does not require major changes to be made. However, there is some potential room for improvement in areas such as phrasing and organization.

Well written - The article is well written in that there are few, if any, grammatical or spelling errors. A few things to consider would be: In the first sentence, the term (IQ>70) is a little ambiguous because of where it is placed. Perhaps rephrase "...deemed to be cognitively "higher functioning" (IQ>70) than other people with autism." Switch the places of the second and third sentences. Sentence 2 says there is no definition of HFA immediately after what appears to be a definition of HFA. Switched with 3 it provides a better transition to the next sentence describing how a concrete definition doesn't exist because it overlaps with Aspergers. The first sentence of the Characterization section says that HFA is characterized by features very similar to Aspergers but does not say what these features are. Listing some of these features here would remove the need to click through to the Aspergers page in order to find out what HFA is actually like.

Verifiable with no original research - All of the sources appear to be secondary and representative of a consensus opinion. Some of the sources are behind pay walls, however, which makes it more difficult to confirm that they are quoted accurately and contextually correct.

Broad in coverage - The article specifically describes what HFA is by describing its relationship to "normal" autism and Aspergers syndrome. It could be a little bit broader by describing some of the common features and symptoms and not expecting that the reader already knows the features and symptoms of "normal" and Asperger type autism.

Neutral - The second sentence of paragraph 2 says some researchers argue HFA and Aspergers are indistinguishable but the rest of the article assumes there are differences with no further references to the researchers who say they are the same.

Illustrated - There are currently no images and there are not many good places to put an image. One image that might be particularly useful would be a diagram of the ways in which HFA is related to "normal" autism and Aspergers. The line about overlap brings to mind a Venn diagram but as there is apparently no clear consensus on the definition, such a diagram probably does not exist.

I reviewed the article "Psychiatric comorbidities in asperger syndrome and high functioning autism: diagnostic challenges." This article examines some of the psychiatric conditions, such as depression and anxiety, that occur in comorbidity with HFA and Asperger Syndrome (AS). It is clearly a secondary source as the data comes from a systematic literature search performed using PubMed. Many studies were examined to find the psychiatric conditions that usually accompany HFA and AS, the tools that can be used to diagnose them and the difficulty in determining whether the psychiatric conditions are a symptom of the autism or are in addition to the autism. One point mentioned in the article but not in the Wiki entry is that while psychiatric conditions are being found in comorbidity with autism, autistic features are being found in comorbidity with psychiatric disorders as well. 3076mengfrp (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Thank you very much for your input. All of the changes you suggested in the writing section have been changed since they seemed valuable. We also agree with what you said about being broad and neutral and we will look into your suggestions. As far as what you mentioned in the review of the outside article, we feel that the article was well represented in our wiki entry and what you mentioned doesn't necessarily merit adding another section. Thank you again for your suggestions, we will look them all over again and consider each of them to make this a better wiki article! Dotterson (talk) 16:03, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

peer review primary article[edit]

In the opening paragraph there are some awkward sentences. For example, "There is no consensus as to the definition" doesn't sound right. This sentence might flow better if it was a little more simple. Perhaps, "There is no consensus on the definition." In the characterization intro I would say psychologists or doctors instead of scientists since those are the people who are diagnosing the child. At first I thought the comparison between HFA and Aspergers was too broad a topic, but after reviewing the sources I see how it is relevant. There are no images with this article, which is understandable since HFA might be hard to represent in an image. All articles are relevant and there is no original research

For the most part the article is well, written. The introductory paragraph has a few awkward sentences that the authors might want to look over and revise. The sentences do not flow well (see above quotation). This can be revised by maybe simplifying the language. Overall subjects are relevant and to the point. The article is neutral in tone, it is unbiased. I specifically reviewed the third source and the authors represented it well. It proved to be a great reference for the article and the authors did a good job supporting it. Birdy1224 (talk) 00:38, 9 April 2013 (UTC)


Hi Birdy1224! We made the change you suggested in the opening paragraph and made some other wording changes that hopefully make the paragraph have a better flow. We also agree with your suggestion to change “scientists or doctors” to “psychologists or doctors” in the characterization intro. This was an appropriate change since the psychologists and doctors are the people who make the diagnosis, not the scientists. We appreciate your feedback! Gfolan (talk) 02:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


Secondary Review[edit]

I think your article is very professional and presents the information in a clear and readable manner. You stay respectful with your terminology and give the spectrum of autism its just significance to show the differences between the conditions. I felt as though you linked your terminology and cited your sources sufficiently and gave multiple descriptions of the condition to prevent ambiguity or confusion. There is a bit of overlap or possible content that could be merged in the treatment and management sections. You briefly mention a serotonin complication that plays a role in the condition, you might want to expand on that to show a possible cause of the condition. Egreaga (talk) 04:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Faculty review[edit]

This article is well written and tackles an important topic. I did some very minor editing. In addition, I added some information on Andrew Wakefield's study on the MMR vaccine which was found fraudulent anad retracted in 2010. I also added a link to the Wikipedia article on the MMR vaccine controversy.

You responded to the reviews but I couldn't find verification of the reliability of the Attwood source. You might be able to eliminate it as a source since I think you only referenced it once along with a number of other references. MMBiology (talk) 18:09, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


Actually it was not found Fraudulent (but other researchers hired by vaccine companies said some methods used where questionable and discredited the research) the cause for regressive autism has not been proven. Active research as also won court cases in which VACCINES where found to lower the mental condition of children. Some of which where diagnoses with regressive autism. The apparent cause where MMR and other types of vaccines. I suggest before saying vaccines are 100% safe you do research in their side effects vs benefits and also smoking did not cause cancer for 30 years. How many years will certain vaccines not cause regressive autism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.121.58 (talk) 06:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Criticism[edit]

I'm not sure how to word it in a way that would work in a Wikipedia article, but arguments against the term should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.42.110 (talk) 04:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist}} template (see the help page).