thank you!
im sorry, I may have some problems with text perception and analysis, so I have to clarify smth. in brief, talking about the PDD-NOS you were trying to say that those individuals who seemed too impaired for AS-1 were categorised as PDD-NOS in past but nowadays they are more likely to be diagnosed with AS-2 or even AS-3?
That was not what I was saying - it's not possible to draw such an inference from the article, whether in general, or specific to those diagnosed at that clinic.
The reason is because while they explained that someone who met the criteria for both AS and ASD would be given a diagnosis of ASD, they did not explain what diagnosis would be given if someone met the diagnosis for both AS and PDD-NOS, and as I noted, the percentage of PDD-NOS persons in their study is, in my experience, highly unusual.