Comparing Math LD Diagnostic Rates Obtained Using LDAC and DSM-5 Criteria: Implications for the Field

IF 3.3 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Meadow Schroeder, M. Drefs, Michael L. Zwiers
{"title":"Comparing Math LD Diagnostic Rates Obtained Using LDAC and DSM-5 Criteria: Implications for the Field","authors":"Meadow Schroeder, M. Drefs, Michael L. Zwiers","doi":"10.1177/0829573520915366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Within the Canadian context, the two major learning disability classification systems are arguably the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the Learning Disabilities Association (LDAC) of Canada’s Official Definition of Learning Disabilities. Several of the more recent changes to the fifth edition of the DSM contrast with the LDAC definition, which establishes them as competing diagnostic frameworks. We investigated the frequency of math learning disability identification when both the LDAC and DSM-5 criteria were modelled and applied to an archived data set (2011–2016). Results support generally similar percentages of math learning disability cases identified when employing LDAC or DSM-5 criteria; however, the two methods identified a different set of cases. Implications for using DSM-5 versus LDAC criteria in diagnosing learning disabilities are discussed, including the need to consider adopting a national diagnostic standard.","PeriodicalId":46445,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of School Psychology","volume":"35 1","pages":"175 - 196"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0829573520915366","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of School Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0829573520915366","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Within the Canadian context, the two major learning disability classification systems are arguably the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the Learning Disabilities Association (LDAC) of Canada’s Official Definition of Learning Disabilities. Several of the more recent changes to the fifth edition of the DSM contrast with the LDAC definition, which establishes them as competing diagnostic frameworks. We investigated the frequency of math learning disability identification when both the LDAC and DSM-5 criteria were modelled and applied to an archived data set (2011–2016). Results support generally similar percentages of math learning disability cases identified when employing LDAC or DSM-5 criteria; however, the two methods identified a different set of cases. Implications for using DSM-5 versus LDAC criteria in diagnosing learning disabilities are discussed, including the need to consider adopting a national diagnostic standard.
使用LDAC和DSM-5标准获得的数学LD诊断率的比较:对该领域的启示
在加拿大的背景下,两个主要的学习障碍分类系统是美国精神病学协会(APA)的《精神障碍诊断与统计手册》和加拿大学习障碍官方定义的学习障碍协会(LDAC)。DSM第五版最近的一些变化与LDAC定义形成了对比,后者将它们建立为相互竞争的诊断框架。当LDAC和DSM-5标准被建模并应用于存档数据集(2011-2016)时,我们调查了数学学习障碍识别的频率。结果表明,采用LDAC或DSM-5标准确定的数学学习障碍病例的百分比大致相似;然而,这两种方法确定了一组不同的病例。讨论了使用DSM-5与LDAC标准诊断学习障碍的意义,包括考虑采用国家诊断标准的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of School Psychology
Canadian Journal of School Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journals of School Psychology (CJSP) is the official journal of the Canadian Association of School Psychologists and publishes papers focusing on the interface between psychology and education. Papers may reflect theory, research, and practice of psychology in education, as well as book and test reviews. The journal is aimed at practitioners, but is subscribed to by university libraries and individuals (i.e. psychologists). CJSP has become the major reference for practicing school psychologists and students in graduate educational and school psychology programs in Canada.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信