A full semantic toolbox is essential for autism research and practice to thrive

A history of childhood schizophrenia and lessons for autism

The diagnosis of childhood schizophrenia was widely employed in the U.S. from the 1930s to the late 1970s. In this paper I will provide a history of the diagnosis. Some of the earliest publications on childhood schizophrenia outlined the notion that childhood schizophrenia had different types. I will outline the development of these types, outlining differing symptoms and causes associated with various types. I outline how different types of childhood schizophrenia were demarcated from one another primarily on age of onset and the type of psychosis which was believed to be present. I will outline how various child psychiatrists viewed the types of childhood schizophrenia posited by other child psychiatrists. I will outline the process of abandoning childhood schizophrenia. I use my history to challenge what I believe are misconceptions about childhood schizophrenia. Also, I will use my history to draw lessons for thinking about modern notions of autism. It shows potential problems around formulating psychiatric diagnoses around causes and how compromises might be needed to prevent those problems. Additionally, childhood schizophrenia shows that psychiatrists could formulate subtypes that are not based upon functioning levels and that we can conceive of subtypes as dynamic whereby someone can change which subtype they exhibit over time.

"There is No Help:" Caregiver Perspectives on Service Needs for Adolescents and Adults with Profound Autism

The underrepresentation of individuals with profound autism (who require 24/7 access to care) in autism research has resulted in limited knowledge about their service needs and a lack of evidence-based practices tailored to those needs. This study explored caregiver perspectives on service needs, barriers to accessing care, and treatment priorities to guide treatment development and improvement of service delivery. A sequential mixed-methods design integrated quantitative survey data (n = 423; Mage = 18.89 years; 26.7% female) with qualitative interviews (n = 20) with caregivers of adolescents and adults with profound autism. Quantitative findings indicated regular socialization opportunities were the most frequently endorsed unmet service need (60.3% of caregivers), followed by primary health care with autism-trained staff (59.3%), social skills instruction (55.8%), life skills instruction (51.3%), and behavioral support (47.3%). Higher likelihood of needing social activity groups was associated with elevated emotional reactivity, higher language level, minoritized ethnicity, and lower household income. Greater need for specialized primary health care was associated with lower income, while the need for social and life skills instruction was associated with increased age and elevated dysphoria. Qualitative analysis identified 10 themes that converged and expanded quantitative findings by highlighting a pervasive shortage of individualized, goal-oriented services, common barriers to care, and the priority of developing centralized treatment settings that coordinate care throughout adulthood. This study identified pressing service needs for adolescents and adults with profound autism in the United States. These insights are crucial for improving the accessibility and quality of clinical care.

Are the diagnostic rates of autistic females increasing? An examination of state-wide trends

BACKGROUND

Autism has been considered a 'male-dominant' condition. However, recent research suggests that autistic females are underdiagnosed, misdiagnosed, and later diagnosed. Females may also have different and more nuanced behavioral profiles. To examine diagnosis rates of females, we used 20 years of state-wide data to characterize historical trends in the diagnosis of autism in females to determine whether the proportion of females diagnosed with autism has changed over time.

METHODS

Data were drawn from 10,247 participants (males = 8,319, females = 1928) who received an autism diagnosis between 2000 and 2021 from state-wide autism centers associated with the University of North Carolina TEACCH Autism Program.

RESULTS

The rates of females diagnosed with autism increased at a greater rate compared with males. Age of diagnosis remained consistently higher for females. Late diagnosis (defined as 13+) increased over time across both males and females, however, was more commonly associated with females, particularly those with co-occurring intellectual disability.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the proportion of females diagnosed with autism has increased steadily over a 20-year period, which likely reflects greater societal knowledge of how autism may manifest differentially in females.

Validity of the multidimensional assessment profile of disruptive behavior in autistic toddlers

Objective

Early measurement of atypical disruptive behavior within autistic children is critical for later referrals to behavioral screenings, diagnoses, and services. Disruptive behavior in autistic toddlers is often measured using a categorical approach and identifies the presence or absence of behavior. In contrast, dimensional approaches evaluate behavior on a spectrum of typical to atypical by measuring the clinical salience of disruptive behavior. We sought to assess the validity of the Infant/Toddler version of the multidimensional assessment profile of disruptive behavior (MAP-DB-IT), a dimensional approach measurement tool, in a sample of autistic toddlers.

Methods

Autistic toddlers (n = 82, M age = 33.2 months, SD = 6.28 months) and their mothers received 8 weeks of caregiver-mediated social communication intervention. Mothers completed the MAP-DB-IT and the Infant Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (ITSEA) across three timepoints: before intervention, immediately after intervention, and at 3 months post-intervention follow-up. The MAP-DB-IT provided scores for three subdomains: temper loss, noncompliance, and aggression (generically or specifically with siblings). Ratings on the MAP-DB-IT were compared to the ITSEA using several analytic strategies such as evaluating (a) the internal consistency of the MAP-DB-IT domain scores; (b) the convergent validity between the two measures; and (c) its convergent change due to intervention and if this varied by child characteristics.

Results

The MAP-DB-IT demonstrated excellent internal consistency across all four subdomains. We evaluated convergent validity and found positive correlations between the (a) ITSEA externalizing and MAP-DB-IT aggression domain, (b) ITSEA externalizing and MAP-DB-IT aggression with siblings domain, and (c) ITSEA dysregulation and MAP-DB-IT temper loss domain.

Conclusion

The MAP-DB-IT is a valid measurement tool for disruptive behavior in autistic toddlers. Clinicians should consider the use of the MAP-DB-IT for young autistic clients presenting with disruptive behavior to (a) discriminate between early developmentally appropriate tantrums from clinically salient dysregulation, and (b) refer to additional behavioral evaluations and services.

A 3D approach to understanding heterogeneity in early developing autisms

Phenotypic heterogeneity in early language, intellectual, motor, and adaptive functioning (LIMA) features are amongst the most striking features that distinguish different types of autistic individuals. Yet the current diagnostic criteria uses a single label of autism and implicitly emphasizes what individuals have in common as core social-communicative and restricted repetitive behavior difficulties. Subtype labels based on the non-core LIMA features may help to more meaningfully distinguish types of autisms with differing developmental paths and differential underlying biology. Using relatively large (n=615) publicly available data from early developing (24-68 months) standardized clinical tests tapping LIMA features, we show that stability-based relative cluster validation analysis can identify two robust and replicable clusters in the autism population with high levels of generalization accuracy (98%). These clusters can be described as Type I versus Type II autisms differentiated by relatively high versus low scores on LIMA features. These two types of autisms are also distinguished by different developmental trajectories over the first decade of life. Finally, these two types of autisms reveal striking differences in functional and structural neuroimaging phenotypes and their relationships with gene expression. This work emphasizes the potential importance of stratifying autism by a Type I versus Type II distinction focused on LIMA features and which may be of high prognostic and biological significance.

Autism Knowledge Assessments: A Closer Examination of Validity by Autism Experts

PURPOSE

The goal of the current study was to conduct a substantive validity review of four autism knowledge assessments with prior psychometric support (Gillespie-Lynch in J Autism and Dev Disord 45(8):2553-2566, 2015; Harrison in J Autism and Dev Disord 47(10):3281-3295, 2017; McClain in J Autism and Dev Disord 50(3):998-1006, 2020; McMahon in Res Autism Spectr Disord 71:101499, 2020). 69 autism experts who served on the editorial board of one or more peer-reviewed autism journals evaluated the accuracy and ambiguity of autism knowledge questions. 34% of the questions were flagged as "potentially problematic" for accuracy, and 17% of the questions were flagged as "potentially problematic" for ambiguity. Autism expert feedback revealed three themes across ambiguous questions: (1) an oversimplification of mixed or still-evolving research literature, (2) an insufficient recognition of the heterogeneity of the autism spectrum, and (3) a lack of clarity in the question/answer prompt. Substantive validity of future autism knowledge assessments should be carefully evaluated via feedback from a diverse group of autism experts and/or potential respondents. Potentially problematic questions can be removed or modified to improve the validity of autism knowledge assessments.

Anti-ableism and scientific accuracy in autism research: a false dichotomy

It was recently argued that autism researchers committed to rejecting ableist frameworks in their research may sacrifice "scientifically accurate" conceptualizations of autism. In this perspective piece, we argue that: (a) anti-ableism vs. scientific accuracy is a false dichotomy, (b) there is no ideology-free science that has claim to scientific accuracy, and (c) autism science has a history of false leads in part because of unexamined ableist ideologies that undergird researcher framings and interpretations of evidence. To illustrate our claims, we discuss several avenues of autism research that were promoted as scientific advances, but were eventually debunked or shown to have much less explanatory value than initially proposed. These research programs have involved claims about autism etiology, the nature of autism and autistic characteristics, and autism intervention. Common to these false leads have been ableist assumptions about autism that inform researcher perspectives. Negative impacts of this work have been mitigated in some areas of autism research, but these perspectives continue to exert influence on the lives of autistic people, including the availability of services, discourses about autism, and sociocultural conceptualizations of autistic people. Examining these false leads may help current researchers better understand how ableism may negatively influence their areas of inquiry. We close with a positive argument that promoting anti-ableism can be done in tandem with increasing scientific accuracy.

Early-Career Autism Researchers Are Shifting Their Research Directions: Tragedy or Opportunity?

Early-career researchers (ECRs) are among the most creative, talented, and energetic researchers, and they play an important role in knowledge production and pushing scientific boundaries. Recent debates have implied that many early-career autism researchers are compelled to shift their areas of focus within autism research as a consequence of their work being scrutinized by the autistic and autism communities. In this Perspective, I draw on my own experience as an early-career autism researcher having recently pivoted my research focus to become more aligned with community priorities. I reflect on whether these putative shifts in research direction are, indeed, a tragedy, as has previously been suggested, or, in fact, an opportunity for autism researchers. I argue that pivoting in research is a demonstration of science adapting to the ever-evolving needs in society and changes in our understanding of neurodiversity, neurodivergence, and research methods. While disagreements between the autistic, autism, and research communities may well feel uncomfortable, these tensions also present an opportunity for us-as non-autistic autism researchers-to reflect and to act toward building trust with the community. I recommend three areas for reflections: the purpose of our research, our position of power, and the epistemic limits of our academic expertise. I end by encouraging ECRs to consider taking actions, however small, to lead the charge in improving practices in autism research.

Bridge-building between communities: Imagining the future of biomedical autism research

A paradigm shift in research culture is required to ease perceived tensions between autistic people and the biomedical research community. As a group of autistic and non-autistic scientists and stakeholders, we contend that through participatory research, we can reject a deficit-based conceptualization of autism while building a shared vision for a neurodiversity-affirmative biomedical research paradigm.

Compassionate pedagogy for neurodiversity in higher education: A conceptual analysis

The neurodiversity paradigm challenges pathologising accounts of neurodevelopmental differences, including autism, attention deficit disorder (ADHD), dyslexia, developmental language disorder (DLD) and others. From a neurodiversity perspective, these differences in the way people perceive, learn about and interact with the world are conceptualised as naturally occurring cognitive variation, akin to biodiversity in the natural environment, which may bring unique strengths and challenges for individuals. An implication of this approach is that interventions designed to create contexts in which neurodivergent people can thrive are needed, in addition to those that seek to ameliorate individual-level difficulties. In this conceptual review, we consider how higher education can offer a context in which cognitive diversity can be noticed, welcomed and accepted with warmth. In universities, neurodiversity is one dimension of difference within an increasingly diverse student population, which overlaps - but is not synonymous - with disability. We argue that improving experience and outcomes for neurodivergent students should be a priority for universities aiming to produce graduates equipped to tackle the complex problems of contemporary society. Drawing on the foundational principles of compassion-focused psychological therapies, we consider how compassion can be enacted within interpersonal interaction, curriculum design, and leadership culture in universities. We apply the insights of double empathy theory to the problem of overcoming barriers of difference in the classroom. Finally, we make recommendations for Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and strengths-based pedagogical approaches, which create a fit-for-purpose educational environment for the widest possible range of learners. This realignment with the neurodiversity paradigm offers an antidote to bolt-on provisions for students who differ from the neuro-normative, and might enable neurodivergent thinkers to flourish within and beyond higher education.