Lumpers and splitters: who knows? Who cares?

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Genomic, Transcriptomic, and Regulomic Analyses Do Not Support Profound Autism as a Distinct Biological Category.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
   Article
2. Integrating "Lumpers" versus "Splitters" Perspectives: Toward a Hierarchical Dimensional Taxonomy of Eating Disorders from Clinician Ratings.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2024
   Article
3. Evaluating the latent structure of the non-social domain of autism in autistic adults.Molecular autism · 2021
   Article
4. DSM-5 ASD moves forward into the past.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2014
   Review

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  In defense of lumping (and splitting).2012
• Comment on
  Validation of proposed DSM-5 criteria for autism spectrum disorder.2012
• Comment on
  Testing the construct validity of proposed criteria for DSM-5 autism spectrum disorder.2012

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as