Related Experiment Videos
Childhood disintegrative disorder. Re-examination of the current concept
1Department of Psychiatry, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh, India. savitam@sancharnet.in
Insights
Childhood disintegrative disorder (CDD) is clinically valid but ICD-10 criteria have limitations, especially regarding age of onset. More research is needed for CDD, a subtype of pervasive developmental disorder (PDD).
Area of Science:
- Child Psychology
- Neurodevelopmental Disorders
- Clinical Psychiatry
Background:
- Childhood disintegrative disorder (CDD) is a rare subtype of pervasive developmental disorder (PDD).
- Existing research on CDD is limited, primarily focusing on clinical descriptions.
- Clinical data comparison between CDD and typical autism is sparse.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare clinical data of 12 CDD cases with 21 autism cases.
- To critically evaluate these cases against ICD-10 diagnostic criteria.
- To identify limitations in current diagnostic criteria for CDD and PDD.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of clinical data for 12 CDD and 21 autism cases.
- Comparative evaluation using ICD-10 diagnostic criteria.
- Critical assessment of diagnostic criteria, focusing on age of onset and classification.
Main Results:
- Findings support the clinical validity of Childhood disintegrative disorder (CDD).
- Identified limitations in ICD-10 criteria, particularly the age of onset for CDD.
- Highlighted conceptual confusion in classifying CDD as a PDD.
Conclusions:
- Childhood disintegrative disorder (CDD) is clinically distinct.
- Current ICD-10 criteria require revision for accurate CDD diagnosis.
- Further research into CDD biology, course, and outcomes is essential.
Abstract:
Childhood disintegrative disorder (CDD), which is classified as a sub-type of pervasive developmental disorder (PDD), has been recognised for many years. Research data on CDD, however, is sparse and it primarily describes the clinical parameters. In this research report clinical data on 12 cases of CDD and 21 cases of typical autism, seen during a specified period, are compared and critically evaluated in reference to the diagnostic criteria in ICD-10 for these disorders. While the findings support the clinical validity of CDD, these also highlight the limitations of the current criteria (ICD-10) particularly the age of onset in CDD and the conceptual confusion in labelling it as a 'PDD'. Need for more research in the areas of the biology, course and outcome of CDD is emphasised.