Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33974159›Full record

ReviewJournal of autism and developmental disorders2021

Does the Arc of Science Bend Towards Impact? Four Decades of Empirical Research Published in JADD Since the DSM-III.

Peter Doehring

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Celebrating 40 years since DSM-III.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Peter DoehringASD Roadmap, 5 Nine Gates Road, Chadds Ford, PA, 19317, USA. peter@asdroadmap.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7953-1271

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study explored the shift from understanding to intervention to population impact in the empirical research published in this journal at five points of time over 40 years since the release of DSM-III. Two-thirds of the more than 600 original studies identified involved basic research, a pattern that is consistent with previous analyses of research funding allocations and that did not change over time. One of every eight studies involved intervention research, which occurred in community-based programs only about one-quarter of the time. These gaps in intervention research and community impact did not improve over time. The findings underscore the need to broaden the training and experience of researchers, and to re-consider priorities for research funding and publication.

Indexed as

Autism Spectrum DisorderDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersEmpirical ResearchHumansApplied researchAutism spectrum disorderBasic researchCommunity programsIntervention researchPublication trendsReview

Identifiers

PMID33974159
PMCPMC8531089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.