Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 821 indexed citations. Written by Ann Le Couteur, Catherine Lord, Patricia Rios, Sarah Robertson and John D. McLennan covering the research area of Cognitive Neuroscience, Clinical Psychology and Developmental and Educational Psychology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Cognitive Neuroscience (767 citations), Genetics (344 citations) and Clinical Psychology (314 citations). Published in Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.

Countries where authors are citing Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Autism diagnostic interview: A standardized investigator-based instrument.

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1007/bf02212936.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026