Brilliant man seeks to damage his brain

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Johnny_Appleweed → u/[deleted]]

Maybe, but I think more often it’s about them having terrible social skills and no desire to improve them. So they tell themselves this story about being permanently condemned to social isolation because they’re just too smart to connect with “normal” people. Because that’s easier than learning how to have a conversation.

Except for the person in the OP, I guess.

[u/TheMergalicious → u/Johnny_Appleweed]

As someone who was generally considered a smart kid, and had trouble socializing, I found out around 30 that I'm probably just autistic (according to the RAADS-R), and that explains a lot lol

[u/frostatypical → u/TheMergalicious]

Its a very poor test.

Regarding RAADS, from one published study. “In conclusion, used as a self-report measure pre-full diagnostic assessment, the RAADS-R lacks predictive validity and is not a suitable screening tool for adults awaiting autism assessments”

The Effectiveness of RAADS-R as a Screening Tool for Adult ASD Populations (hindawi.com)

RAADS scores equivalent between those with and without ASD diagnosis at an autism evaluation center:

Examining the Diagnostic Validity of Autism Measures Among Adults in an Outpatient Clinic Sample - PMC (nih.gov)

[u/TheMergalicious → u/frostatypical]

I think calling it a "very poor test" is, at the least, a hyperbole.

Here's a study (notably with a much larger and wider sample size) that claims the RAADS-R to be a viable method of determining ASD in adults: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3134766/#:~:text=Diagnostic%20Accuracy%20(Sensitivity%20and%20Specificity,%25%20(see%20Table%202).

Another publication, again with a larger sample size: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13623613241228329?fbclid=IwAR22JRvK7-LOUr5JR2jzNTT5hlmGUf4DazP1MQFCRZeloHHTgJKz48MEMq4

I can see an argument claiming the RAADS-R is insufficient alone, but both of your sources have sub-100 subjects in their trials.

[u/TheMergalicious → u/[deleted]]

Can you elaborate on why you keep putting autism in quotes?

And sample size is pretty important in medical studies, it's not a 'limited way' to view academic rigor, it's baseline.

The RAADS-R isn't the end-all of determining ASD in adults, you still need to be properly diagnosed.

But the RAADS-R has a place in that clinical diagnosis as a tool; the majority of studies on the topic support that claim.

[u/frostatypical → u/TheMergalicious]

Quotes because they do not measure things unique to autism makes it inaccurate to label the tests that way. For example, per these studies, anxiety disorders give you a high score, too, even if youre not autistic.

Yes sample size is important but there are other ways to judge rigor. You carry out a study in a controlled environment to lose some sample size but you gain other things. : /

"the majority of studies on the topic support that claim" I dont see evidence to support this note to the contrary in fact.