Autism Research: An Objective Quantitative Review of Progress and Focus Between 1994 and 2015

The nosology and epidemiology of Autism has undergone transformation following consolidation of once disparate disorders under the umbrella diagnostic, autism spectrum disorders. Despite this re-conceptualization, research initiatives, including the NIMH's Research Domain Criteria and Precision...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inFrontiers in psychology Vol. 9; p. 1526
Main Authors Whyatt, Caroline P, Torres, Elizabeth B
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 23.08.2018
Subjects
autism
bibliometrics
connectivity metrics
graph theory
Psychology
quantitative review
graph theory
bibliometrics
quantitative review
autism
connectivity metrics
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The nosology and epidemiology of Autism has undergone transformation following consolidation of once disparate disorders under the umbrella diagnostic, autism spectrum disorders. Despite this re-conceptualization, research initiatives, including the NIMH's Research Domain Criteria and Precision Medicine, highlight the need to bridge psychiatric and psychological classification methodologies with biomedical techniques. Combining traditional bibliometric co-word techniques, with tenets of graph theory and network analysis, this article provides an objective thematic review of research between 1994 and 2015 to consider evolution and focus. Results illustrate growth in Autism research since 2006, with nascent focus on physiology. However, modularity and citation analytics demonstrate dominance of subjective psychological or psychiatric constructs, which may impede progress in the identification and stratification of biomarkers as endorsed by new research initiatives.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
Present address: Caroline P. Whyatt, Psychology and Sport Science, School of Life and Medical Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, United Kingdom
Reviewed by: Gail A. Alvares, Telethon Kids Institute, Australia; Mariano Luis Alcañiz Raya, Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain
This article was submitted to Quantitative Psychology and Measurement, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Edited by: Frank Emmert-Streib, Tampere University of Technology, Finland
ISSN:1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01526