u/NotJustMeAnymore

"Each of the 39 wedges in the circle represents one question in the Autism Symptom Dimensions Questionnaire. The traits associated with each question (listed below) are grouped into key symptom factors—the main aspects of behavior that evaluators look for when they assess someone for autism."

Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-autism-spectrum-isnt-a-sliding-scale-39-traits-show-the-complexity

[Image: Graphic shows a chart resembling a color wheel with 29 wedges, each representing one trait from the Autism Symptom Dimensions Questionnaire. The traits are grouped by color into 10 key symptom factors including basic social communication, repetitive motor behaviors and restricted interests. Five concentric circular dotted lines represent possible scores of one to five, with five indicating a higher degree of neurodivergence. The 39 traits are listed alongside the chart.

Image: Amanda Montañez; Source: “The Autism Symptom Dimensions Questionnaire: Development and Psychometric Evaluation of a New, Open-Source Measure of Autism Symptomatology,” by Thomas W. Frazier et al., in Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, Vol. 65, No. 8; August 2023 (data)]

https://preview.redd.it/cmcurhp21d2h1.png?width=2000&format=png&auto=webp&s=a23111cb248166edf362c9281394f8eb146e06b7

CW: medical invalidation, misdiagnosis, research ethics issues

I’ve got a long and honestly pretty upsetting story about a research experience, and I’m going to try to lay it out as clearly as possible.

I work in clinical research at a university, and I like participating in studies outside my field/department when I can. I signed up for a study on the reliability of adult ADHD diagnosis. I was diagnosed with autism + ADHD a little over a year ago, and the study advertised a comprehensive psychological evaluation, which sounded interesting.

The assessments they used included a clinical interview, selected DIAMOND modules (Anxiety, Mood, ADHD), the Barkley Adult ADHD Rating Scale‑IV, Conners CPT‑3, COWAT, Trail Making Test A/B, MMPI‑3, and some WAIS‑V subtests. Everything was administered by a grad trainee. The supervising licensed psychologist never met me but still signed the diagnostic report.

The “diagnostic” report they gave me said they ruled out ADHD. They claimed my executive functioning issues, attention problems, working‑memory weaknesses, etc. were better explained by “persistent anxiety and depression,” which they said they diagnosed me with, with diagnostic codes included. Their justification was that my CPT‑3 scores were mostly average with mild deficits, and that I had slightly elevated MMPI‑3 validity scales. (If you’ve ever taken the MMPI, you know it’s not exactly neurodivergent‑friendly.) The implication was basically that I over‑reported symptoms and it was “just anxiety.”

A huge red flag: they told me this report was equivalent to a medical report that could be used for accommodations or treatment. As someone who works in research, I know how serious it is to blur the line between research and clinical care. That alone is a problem I reported to the IRB.

But that wasn’t the only issue.

During the interview, I mentioned I had an autism diagnosis. They took that single comment and, in the report, said my profile was “inconsistent with autism” and that they ruled it out. They did not do any autism assessments or explore it further. They also claimed to rule out bipolar disorder, psychotic disorders, and a current eating disorder… none of which were assessed. They literally just took my word for past history and then declared those conditions “ruled out.” They said they ruled out a current eating disorder because I mentioned I had one in the past. Again, they didn’t assess or verify if I didn’t have a current eating disorder; they just took my word for it and said it was ruled it by them.

They also suggested I might show signs of a Cluster C personality disorder (specifically avoidant PD), which I’m pretty sure was them misinterpreting autistic traits.

I talked through all of this with a coworker/friend who is a neuropsychologist. She knows the program director and, with my permission, reached out. According to her, the director spoke with the psychologist, who is now “willing to talk to me and soften his conclusions.” He also said the IRB’s only concern was that a grad student was listed as PI instead of him. But the last update I got from the IRB was that they were still investigating, and I specifically asked whether the consent form I signed matched the approved version because there were irregularities there too.

The director told my coworker that the psychologist would be more involved in explaining results in the future, but honestly, I don’t feel like the seriousness of this situation is being acknowledged. This is a potentially dangerous way to run a research study, especially when they’re ruling out conditions they didn’t assess for, contradicting existing diagnoses, and presenting research as clinical care.

I’m frustrated, and I’m not sure what else to do besides follow up with the IRB (even though I know they can’t share much). My coworker sent a new statement from me to the director, but we haven’t heard back yet. I just want participants to be protected, and I needed to vent.

EDIT: I really wanted to thank you all so much for your support and encouragement. I was feeling pretty insecure about how much I should push this, and y’all have helped and encouraged me so much. And made me feel less alone. I also really appreciate the people who gave ideas for further reporting! Those are useful suggestions. I had considered reporting to the licensing board but worried that was too far, but I’m really considering it again now.

I do also want to give more context for where it’s at right now. The last I heard the IRB is continuing its investigation. The program director talked to the PI, that resulted in the email where he said the PI was open to “softening some of the conclusions.” Apparently the PI was also encouraged to be more involved in feedback sessions and be more careful about ruling out conditions that weren’t assessed. Though it did seem the PI was shifting some of the blame to the trainee. But the PI was also “open to meeting” with me to help me understand how the conclusions were reached. “It seems like one of her major concerns was the different outcome from this evaluation compared to other evaluations that she’s had, so perhaps such a discussion could help her understand how that happens.”

So I’ve requested a meeting with the program director directly, and I sent another follow-up email to the IRB today. Again, thank you all so much for your words of support!! It helped so much. I’ll update if anything happens.

Hi, I'm setting my son up with his first PC (previously he played on Switch using my Microsoft account).

I searched the sub and it seems that he will need to start over with his own Microsoft account, which is probably fine given he is also moving from Bedrock to Java and I'm not sure anything will transfer over from his account anyway? Please clarify if I'm wrong about that.

Can anyone provide some guidance on the best way to do this? I am purchasing the software for the PC now, but they asked me to sign into the Microsoft account and then I got stuck, not sure what to do.

Budget: $2,000
Country: USA
Use Case: Gaming — Minecraft / School - Zoom
Preferred Specs: ???
Notes: See below

Hi, I'm mom to a 10 year old who needs a PC for Minecraft Java, and to have a machine to do online schooling which will involve additional gaming. I also anticipate him moving to Steam from the Switch and mobile, and having more gaming requirements in the near future. I would prefer a desktop for all the reasons, but we spend two months away from home and I need something portable. We're in the US.

I know the specs are different, so I guess I'm asking for best value for price. I would prefer to spend less, but I'd also like it to last so I've offered a range. I'm looking at:

1. ASUS ROG Zephyrus G16 16" OLED 2.5K 240Hz Gaming Laptop - Intel Core Ultra 9 - 16GB RAM - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 - 1TB SSD. Current price at Best Buy: $1,774.99
2. Lenovo - Legion 7i 16" 2.5k OLED Gaming Laptop - Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX 2025 - 32GB RAM - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 - 1TB SSD. Current price at Best Buy: $1,499.99
3. Lenovo LOQ 15.6" FHD 144Hz Gaming laptop - AMD Ryzen 7 250 - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 - 16GB DDR5 - 512GB SSD. Current price at Best Buy: $1,249.99
4. MSI Crosshair 18 HX AI 18" Gaming Laptop NVIDIA RTX 5070 Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX (Beat i9-14900HX) 32GB DDR5 1TB SSD. Current price at New Egg: $1,989.00

Are these all good options? Should I be looking at something else altogether? Which of these specs are non-negotiable?

A note to consider: my kid has been known to damage devices (when dysregulated), but he has a high end tablet he has been taking good care of, so I'm hopeful he will do the same with his laptop. Any accessories I should plan to purchase, like a cooling pad, let me know.

TIA!

Do You Identify As Autistic?

Belong To An Ethnic Minority Group?

Identify As A Woman?

Aged 18 Or Older?

Mariam Sobayo (Mariam.Sobayo2@Mail.Dcu.Ie), a graduate student at Dublin City University, is looking for research participants to inform their research:

At The Intersections Of Identity: Autistic Ethnic Minority Women Navigating Masking In Productivity- Driven Systems.

Aims: Understanding how productivity-driven pressures intersect with identity and masking, and how these dynamics affect autistic women from ethnic minority backgrounds in educational and professional contexts.

Link to register interest in study and gain additional information:

https://dcusurveys.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV\_8krdnicibUmFREG?Q\_CHL=qr

Posting on behalf of researcher Connie Matthew (Email: c.e.matthew@wlv.ac.uk):

AUTISTIC BURNOUT & SCHOOL RETURN

What: I am a Master's student at the University of Wolverhampton (MSc Psychology of Mental Health and Wellbeing). My research is a 45–60 minute online interview about your "lived experience" of returning to mainstream education after a period of burnout.

Who? I am looking for participants who:

• Self-identify as autistic (and do not hold a formal clinical diagnosis).
• Are aged 18 or over and reside in the UK.
• Experienced a period of absence from a UK mainstream secondary school due to autistic burnout.
• Successfully transitioned back into a mainstream secondary education.
• Are not currently experiencing an acute state of crisis or active burnout.

How is it accessible?

• Relaxed, semi-structured video call (Microsoft Teams).
• "Camera-off" if preferred.
• Full anonymity (pseudonyms used).
• The interview questions will be sent to you 48 hours in advance—no surprises.

Join Us: To read the full Information Sheet or ask any questions, please email the researcher directly: c.e.matthew@wlv.ac.uk

[Researcher: Connie Matthew | Ethics Approved | Unfunded Study]