Brief report: comparability of DSM-IV and DSM-5 ASD research samples.

The team asked a simple question. Will our research kids still have autism under the new DSM-5 rules?

They looked at high-functioning children who already had DSM-IV autism. Each child took two gold-standard tests: the ADOS and the ADI-R. Then they checked who still met DSM-5 criteria.

When both tests were used together, 93% of the children kept the diagnosis. The sample stayed almost the same.

That means old DSM-IV research groups remain valid for future DSM-5 studies.

Che Daud et al. (2026) back this up in a giant review. They show that ADOS plus ADI-R is still the world’s main diagnostic pair. Their map of 10 years of data includes the 93% figure you just read.

Cholemkery et al. (2016) dig deeper into the same ADI-R numbers. They found three severity clusters, not separate sub-types. Their gradient view supports keeping the whole group together, exactly what Fahmie et al. (2013) proved possible.

Beggiato et al. (2017) sound a warning. They found ADI-R items can under-score girls. So the 93% continuity is true overall, but clinicians should watch for gender bias and add extra tools when needed.

You can trust past high-functioning autism studies that used both ADOS and ADI-R. Keep using the pair for intake assessments to stay aligned with DSM-5. If you evaluate girls, add a gender-sensitive lens or second tool so no one slips through the cracks.