An Abbreviated Screening Instrument for Autism Spectrum Disorders

Screening for Autism: A Review of the Current State, Ongoing Challenges, and Novel Approaches on the Horizon

Screening for autism is recommended in pediatric primary care. However, the median age of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis is substantially higher than the age at which autism can reliably be identified, suggesting room for improvements in autism recognition at young ages, especially for children from minoritized racial and ethnic groups, low-income families, and families who prefer a language other than English. Novel approaches are being developed to utilize new technologies in aiding in autism recognition. However, attention to equity is needed to minimize bias. Additional research on the benefits and potential harms of universal autism screening is needed. The authors provide suggestions for pediatricians who are considering implementing autism-screening programs.

Sensitivity and Specificity of the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (Original and Revised): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

The Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) and the M-CHAT, Revised With Follow-up (M-CHAT-R/F)-henceforth referred to as M-CHAT(-R/F)-are the most commonly used toddler screeners for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Their use often differs from that in the original validation studies, resulting in a range of estimates of sensitivity and specificity. Also, given the variability in reports of the clinical utility of the M-CHAT(-R/F), researchers and practitioners lack guidance to inform autism screening protocols.

Objective

To synthesize variability in sensitivity and specificity of M-CHAT(-R/F) across multiple factors, including procedures for identifying missed cases, likelihood level, screening age, and single compared with repeated screenings.

Data Sources

A literature search was conducted with PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify studies published between January 1, 2001, and August 31, 2022.

Study Selection

Articles were included if the studies used the M-CHAT(-R/F) (ie, original or revised version) to identify new ASD cases, were published in English-language peer-reviewed journals, included at least 10 ASD cases, reported procedures for false-negative case identification, screened children by 48 months, and included information (or had information provided by authors when contacted) needed to conduct the meta-analysis.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted within the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool evaluated bias in sample selection. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by 2 authors independently. The overall diagnostic accuracy of the M-CHAT(-R/F) was assessed with the hierarchic summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) model.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratios, and HSROC curves of M-CHAT(-R/F).

Results

The review included 50 studies with 51 samples. The pooled sensitivity of M-CHAT(-R/F) was 0.83 (95% CI, 0.77-0.88), and the pooled specificity was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.89-0.97). Heterogeneity analyses revealed greater diagnostic accuracy for low- vs high-likelihood samples, a concurrent vs prospective case confirmation strategy, a large vs small sample size, use of M-CHAT(-R/F) Follow-up, and non-English vs English only.

Conclusions and Relevance

Overall, results of this study suggest the utility of the M-CHAT(-R/F) as an ASD screener. The wide variability in psychometric properties of M-CHAT(-R/F) highlights differences in screener use that should be considered in research and practice.

Predictive Value of Early Autism Detection Models Based on Electronic Health Record Data Collected Before Age 1 Year

Importance

Autism detection early in childhood is critical to ensure that autistic children and their families have access to early behavioral support. Early correlates of autism documented in electronic health records (EHRs) during routine care could allow passive, predictive model-based monitoring to improve the accuracy of early detection.

Objective

To quantify the predictive value of early autism detection models based on EHR data collected before age 1 year.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective diagnostic study used EHR data from children seen within the Duke University Health System before age 30 days between January 2006 and December 2020. These data were used to train and evaluate L2-regularized Cox proportional hazards models predicting later autism diagnosis based on data collected from birth up to the time of prediction (ages 30-360 days). Statistical analyses were performed between August 1, 2020, and April 1, 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Prediction performance was quantified in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) at clinically relevant model operating thresholds.

Results

Data from 45 080 children, including 924 (1.5%) meeting autism criteria, were included in this study. Model-based autism detection at age 30 days achieved 45.5% sensitivity and 23.0% PPV at 90.0% specificity. Detection by age 360 days achieved 59.8% sensitivity and 17.6% PPV at 81.5% specificity and 38.8% sensitivity and 31.0% PPV at 94.3% specificity.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this diagnostic study of an autism screening test, EHR-based autism detection achieved clinically meaningful accuracy by age 30 days, improving by age 1 year. This automated approach could be integrated with caregiver surveys to improve the accuracy of early autism screening.

Separate scoring algorithms for specific identification priorities optimize the screening properties of the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers (STAT)

The Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers (STAT) is a validated stage-2 autism spectrum disorder (ASD) screening measure that takes 20 minutes to administer and comprises 12 play-based items that are scored according to specific criteria. This study examines an expanded version (STAT-E) that includes the examiner's subjective ratings of children's social engagement (SE) and atypical behaviors (AB) in the scoring algorithm. The sample comprised 238 children who were 24-35 months old. The STAT-E assessors had limited ASD experience to mimic its use by community-based non-specialists, and were trained using a scalable web-based platform. A diagnostic evaluation was completed by clinical experts who were blind to the STAT-E results. Logistic regression, ROC curves, and classification matrices and metrics were used to determine the screening properties of STAT-E when scored using the original STAT scoring algorithm versus a new algorithm that included the SE and AB ratings. Inclusion of the SE and AB ratings improved positive risk classification appreciably, while the specificity declined. These results suggest that the STAT-E using the original STAT scoring algorithm optimizes specificity, while the STAT-E scoring algorithm with the two new ratings optimizes the positive risk classification. Using multiple scoring algorithms on the STAT may provide improved screening accuracy for diverse contexts, and a scalable web-based tutorial may be a pathway for increasing the number of community providers who can administer the STAT and contribute toward increased rates of autism screening.

Development and initial testing of the BABY-BISCUIT in an at-risk population

PURPOSE

Early identification of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) via screeners for diagnostic measures are a high priority. At present, there is no consensus on one screener due to the need for better sensitivity and specificity. In this study, we report on the development and utility of the BABY-BISCUIT, a six-item screener based on a modified subset of items from the Baby and Infant Screen for Children with aUtIsm Traits (BISCUIT).

METHODS

A sample of 504 children between 17-3 9months of age, who consisted of toddlers identified as at-risk for neurodevelopmental and other health disorders, were tested during an annual screening through the Louisiana EarlySteps program.

RESULTS

An exploratory factor analysis yielded a one-factor solution (X2 = 48.62, df = 9, p = <.001). High sensitivity (i.e., 100.0%) at the cost of reduced specificity (i.e., 33.3%, AUC = 0.957) was found for an optimal screening cutoff score of 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study suggest that the BABY-BISCUIT has the potential to be a short and easily administered screener for ASD to inform whether further ASD assessment is necessary. Further investigation of convergent validity with established ASD measures is recommended.

A Delayed Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the Setting of Complex Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) presents a diagnostic challenge due to its highly heterogeneous nature. The most common clinical manifestations include difficulty with social interaction and the presence of repetitive sensory-motor behaviors. Females are more likely to be misdiagnosed or have a delayed diagnosis compared to males. Other factors that contribute to delayed diagnosis include low socioeconomic status and belonging to an ethnic minority. In pediatrics, the goal of ASD screening is to diagnose ASD earlier, with timely referral to early intervention services, so that better long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes can be achieved. Moreover, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is the most common comorbidity in patients with ASD. While the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders fourth edition (DSM-4) prohibited a co-diagnosis of autism and ADHD, the DSM-5 has modified exclusion criteria to allow such. This case describes a minority adolescent male patient who presented initially with complex ADHD, who upon extensive evaluation, was ultimately diagnosed with co-existing autism. This patient’s diagnosis of ASD at the age of 14 in the setting of a pre-existing complex ADHD diagnosis demonstrates how symptoms of inattention or hyperactivity may convolute underlying or newly emerging social interaction difficulties. We highlight how children who are diagnosed with ADHD should be screened or evaluated for autism in the right clinical setting, such as evident persistence of social interaction impairment despite ADHD treatment.

Effectiveness of Screening in Early Intervention Settings to Improve Diagnosis of Autism and Reduce Health Disparities

IMPORTANCE

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends referring children at elevated risk of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) for Part C early intervention (EI) services, but notes that EI services often fail to provide ASD screening.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the hypothesis that a multistage screening protocol for ASD implemented in 3 EI settings will increase autism detection, especially among Spanish-speaking families.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Difference-in-differences analyses with propensity score weighting of a quasi-experimental design using administrative data on 3 implementation EI agencies and 9 comparison EI agencies from 2012 to 2018 provided by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Eligible children were aged 14 to 36 months, enrolled in EI, had no prior ASD diagnosis or medical condition precluding participation, and had parents who spoke English or Spanish. The final analytic sample included 33 326 unique patients assessed across 150 200 person-quarters.

EXPOSURES

Multistage ASD assessment protocol including ASD screening questionnaires, observational screener, and diagnostic evaluation.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Increased incidence of ASD diagnoses as documented in Department of Public Health records and reductions in language-associated health care disparities.

RESULTS

Implementation of screening at 3 EI sites was associated with a significant increase in the rate of ASD diagnoses (incidence rate ratios [IRR], 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-2.1; P < .001), representing an additional 8.1 diagnoses per 1000 children per quarter. Among Spanish-speaking families, screening was also associated with a significant increase in the rate of ASD diagnoses (IRR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.6-4.3; P < .001), representing 15.4 additional diagnoses per 1000 children per quarter-a larger increase than for non-Spanish-speaking families (interaction IRR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.0-3.1; P = .005). Exploratory analyses revealed that screening was associated with a larger increase in the rate of ASD diagnoses among boys (IRR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.3; P < .001) than among girls (IRR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.6-1.7; P = .84).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this study, associations between increased rates of ASD diagnoses and reductions in disparities for Spanish-speaking households support the effectiveness of multistage screening in EI. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of ASD screening in EI settings as well as a rigorous evaluation of ASD screening in any setting with a no-screening comparison condition. Given that the intervention included multiple components, mechanisms of action warrant further research, as do disparities by child sex.

Delays in autism diagnosis for U.S. Spanish-speaking families: The contribution of appointment availability

Promoting equity in health services requires an understanding of the mechanisms that produce disparities. Utilizing a sequential, mixed-methods, explanatory study design, we analyzed child-, family-, and organizational-level factors and their association with wait times for an ASD diagnostic evaluation among 353 families scheduled for English and Spanish language appointments (27% Spanish language). A subset of parents and caregivers participated in English and Spanish language focus groups to provide their perspectives on the diagnostic process. Spanish language was associated with greater completion of, and time to evaluations than English language. The only variable found to mediate associations with time-to-evaluation was appointment availability - an organizational factor. Qualitative results elucidate potential explanations for greater Spanish language evaluation completion (e.g., fewer community-based diagnostic options). Results serve as a case study to support the utility and importance of analyzing the influence of organizational-level factors on delays and disparities for childhood health and mental health services. We discuss our findings in relation to strategies that can be widely applied to support equitable services access for childhood diagnostic and intervention services.

The Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders: Field-testing an autism-specific screening tool for children 12 to 36 months of age

LAY ABSTRACT

There is a critical need for accurate screening tools for autism spectrum disorder in very young children so families can access tailored intervention services as early as possible. However, there are few screeners designed for children 18-24 months. Developing screeners that pick up on the signs of autism spectrum disorder in very young children has proved even more challenging. In this study, we examined a new autism-specific parent-report screening tool, the Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders for children between 12 and 36 months of age. Field-testing was done in five sites with 471 children screened for communication delays in primary care or referred for familial risk or concern for autism spectrum disorder. The Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders was tested in three age groups: 12-17, 18-23, and 24-36 months. A best-estimate diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, developmental delay, or typical development was made. Analyses examined all 46 items and identified 30 items that best discriminated autism spectrum disorder from the non-spectrum groups. Cutoffs were established for each age group with good sensitivity and specificity. Results provide preliminary support for the accuracy of the Early Screening for Autism and Communication Disorders as an autism-specific screener in children 12-36 months with elevated risk of communication delay or autism spectrum disorder.

Understanding How Parents Make Meaning of Their Child's Behaviors During Screening for Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Longitudinal Qualitative Investigation

A family's journey in understanding their child's behaviors in relation to Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) frequently begins with screening. This study aimed to characterize the interpretive processes that unfold for parents. We employed longitudinal interviews with 19 families engaged in a community-based multi-stage screening protocol. Parents participated in 1-6 interviews dependent upon children's length of engagement in the screening protocol; data were analyzed through modified grounded theory. Parents who moved towards understanding their child's behaviors as ASD expressed (1) sensitization to ASD symptoms, (2) differentiation from other developmental conditions, and (3) use of the ASD diagnosis to explain the etiology of concerning behaviors. Identifying interpretive processes involved during ASD screening provides new opportunities for shared decision-making.

Improving Autism Screening and Referrals With Electronic Support and Evaluations in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Universal screening for autism promotes early evidence-based treatment. However, many children are not screened, and screened children are often not referred for autism evaluation.

METHODS

We implemented process changes in 3 phases: phase 1, changing the screening instrument and adding decision support; phase 2, adding automatic reminders; and phase 3, adding a referral option for autism evaluations in primary care. We analyzed the proportion of visits with autism screening at 2 intervention clinics before and after implementation of process changes versus 27 community clinics (which received only automatic reminders in phase 2) with χ2 test and interrupted time series. We evaluated changes in referral for autism evaluation by calculating the rate ratio for referral.

RESULTS

In 12 233 visits over 2 years (baseline and phased improvements), autism screening increased by 52% in intervention clinics (58.6%-88.8%; P < .001) and 21% in community clinics (43.4%-52.4%; P < .001). In phase 1, interrupted time series trend for screening in intervention clinics increased by 2% per week (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1% to 2.9%) and did not increase in community clinics. In phase 2, screening in the community clinics increased by 0.46% per week (95% CI: 0.03% to 0.89%). In phase 3, the intervention clinic providers referred patients for diagnostic evaluation 3.4 times more frequently (95% CI: 2.0 to 5.8) than at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

We improved autism screening and referrals by changing the screening instrument, adding decision support, using automatic reminders, and offering autism evaluation in primary care in intervention clinics. Automatic reminders alone improved screening in community clinics.

Detection of Early Warning Signs in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Systematic Review

Due to the exponential increase of autism spectrum disorders’ prevalence in Western countries, it is necessary to improve early detection and intervention to enhance developmental milestones. This systematic review identified the most effective screening instrument, which can be used at an early age and which identifies the maximum number of autism cases. We identified several instruments with adequate predictive properties—the Autism Parent Screen for Infants (APSI), Battelle Development Inventory, second edition (BDI-2); Brief Infant-Toddler Social and Emotional Assessment (BITSEA); First Year Inventory (FYI); Infant-Toddler Checklist/Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile (ITC/CSBS-DP); Program of Research and Studies on AUTISM (PREAUT-Grid); Checklist for Early Signs of Developmental Disorders (CESDD); Social Attention and Communication Study (SACS); and the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers and Young Children (STAT)—that can be applied from 12 months of age in Western countries. The ITC/CSBS-DP has been proposed for universal screening from 12 months of age onwards, complemented by the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised/Revised with Follow-Up (M-CHAT-R/F), which can be used from 15 months of age onwards. This strategy could improve early detection in at-risk children within the current health system, thus allowing for early intervention.

Validation of the Developmental Check-In Tool for Low-Literacy Autism Screening

BACKGROUND

Persistent disparities exist in early identification of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) among children from low-income families who are racial and/or ethnic minorities and where English is not the primary language. Parental literacy and level of maternal education may contribute to disparities. The Developmental Check-In (DCI) is a visually based ASD screening tool created to reduce literacy demands and to be easily administered and scored across settings. In a previous study, the DCI showed acceptable discriminative ability between ASD versus non-ASD in a young, underserved sample at high-risk for ASD. In this study, we tested the DCI among an unselected, general sample of young underserved children.

METHODS

Six hundred twenty-four children ages 24 to 60 months were recruited through Head Start and Early Head Start. Parents completed the DCI, Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-Up, and Social Communication Questionnaire. Children scoring positive on any measure received evaluation for ASD. Those screening negative on both Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-Up and Social Communication Questionnaire were considered non-ASD.

RESULTS

Parents were primarily Hispanic, reported high school education or less, and had public or no insurance. The DCI demonstrated good discriminative power (area under the curve = 0.80), performing well across all age groups, genders, levels of maternal education, primary language, and included ethnic and racial groups. Item-level analyses indicated that 24 of 26 DCI items discriminated ASD from non-ASD.

CONCLUSIONS

The DCI is a promising ASD screening tool for young, underserved children and may be of particular value in screening for ASD for those with low literacy levels or with limited English proficiency.

Seeing a Page in a Flipbook: Shorter Visual Temporal Integration Windows in 2-Year-Old Toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) experience differences in visual temporal processing, the part of vision responsible for parsing continuous input into discrete objects and events. Here we investigated temporal processing in 2-year-old toddlers diagnosed with ASD and age-matched typically developing (TD) toddlers. We used a visual search task where the visibility of the target was determined by the pace of a display sequence. On integration trials, each display viewed alone had no visible target, but if integrated over time, the target became visible. On segmentation trials, the target became visible only when displays were perceptually segmented. We measured the percent of trials when participants fixated the target as a function of the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between displays. We computed the crossover point of the integration and segmentation performance functions for each group, an estimate of the temporal integration window (TIW), the period in which visual input is combined. We found that both groups of toddlers had significantly longer TIWs (125 ms) than adults (65 ms) from previous studies using the same paradigm, and that toddlers with ASD had significantly shorter TIWs (108 ms) than chronologically age-matched TD controls (142 ms). LAY SUMMARY: We investigated how young children, with and without autism, organize dynamic visual information across time, using a visual search paradigm. We found that toddlers with autism had higher temporal resolution than typically developing (TD) toddlers of the same age - that is, they are more likely to be able to detect rapid change across time, relative to TD toddlers. These differences in visual temporal processing can impact how one sees, interprets, and interacts with the world. Autism Res 2021, 14: 946-958. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research and Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Autism spectrum disorder risk prediction: A systematic review of behavioral and neural investigations

A reliable diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is difficult to make until after toddlerhood. Detection in an earlier age enables early intervention, which is typically more effective. Recent studies of the development of brain and behavior in infants and toddlers have provided important insights in the diagnosis of autism. This extensive review focuses on published studies of predicting the diagnosis of autism during infancy and toddlerhood younger than 3 years using behavioral and neuroimaging approaches. After screening a total of 782 papers, 17 neuroimaging and 43 behavioral studies were reviewed. The features for prediction consist of behavioral measures using screening tools, observational and experimental methods, brain volumetric measures, and neural functional activation and connectivity patterns. The classification approaches include logistic regression, linear discriminant function, decision trees, support vector machine, and deep learning based methods. Prediction performance has large variance across different studies. For behavioral studies, the sensitivity varies from 20% to 100%, and specificity ranges from 48% to 100%. The accuracy rates range from 61% to 94% in neuroimaging studies. Possible factors contributing to this inconsistency may be partially due to the heterogeneity of ASD, different targeted populations (i.e., high-risk group for ASD and general population), age when the features were collected, and validation procedures. The translation to clinical practice requires extensive further research including external validation with large sample size and optimized feature selection. The use of multi-modal features, e.g., combination of neuroimaging and behavior, is worth further investigation to improve the prediction accuracy.

Multi-stage Screening in Early Intervention: A Critical Strategy for Improving ASD Identification and Addressing Disparities

Health disparities in ASD detection affect children's access to subsequent interventions. We examined potential disparities in implementation of a multi-stage ASD screening and diagnostic evaluation protocol in Part C Early Intervention with 4943 children ages 14-36 months (mean 22.0 months; 62.9% boys, 73.3% children of color, 34.9% non-English-primary language, 64.5% publicly-insured). Participation and follow-through were high (64.9% and 65.3% at first- and second-stage screening, respectively, 84.6% at diagnostic evaluation). Logistic regressions identified predictors of screening participation and outcomes at each stage; demographic differences (race, language, public insurance) were observed only at first-stage screening and reflected higher participation for children of color and higher positive screens for publicly-insured children. Results suggest the multi-stage screening protocol shows promise in addressing disparities in early diagnosis.

Overview and Introduction to Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a complex neurodevelopmental disorder generally manifesting in the first few years of life and tending to persist into adolescence and adulthood. It is characterized by deficits in communication and social interaction and restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, and activities. It is a disorder with multifactorial etiology. In this chapter, we will focus on the most important and common epidemiological studies, pathogenesis, screening, and diagnostic tools along with an explication of genetic testing in ASD.

Identification, Evaluation, and Management of Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a common neurodevelopmental disorder with reported prevalence in the United States of 1 in 59 children (approximately 1.7%). Core deficits are identified in 2 domains: social communication/interaction and restrictive, repetitive patterns of behavior. Children and youth with ASD have service needs in behavioral, educational, health, leisure, family support, and other areas. Standardized screening for ASD at 18 and 24 months of age with ongoing developmental surveillance continues to be recommended in primary care (although it may be performed in other settings), because ASD is common, can be diagnosed as young as 18 months of age, and has evidenced-based interventions that may improve function. More accurate and culturally sensitive screening approaches are needed. Primary care providers should be familiar with the diagnostic criteria for ASD, appropriate etiologic evaluation, and co-occurring medical and behavioral conditions (such as disorders of sleep and feeding, gastrointestinal tract symptoms, obesity, seizures, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, and wandering) that affect the child's function and quality of life. There is an increasing evidence base to support behavioral and other interventions to address specific skills and symptoms. Shared decision making calls for collaboration with families in evaluation and choice of interventions.  This single clinical report updates the 2007 American Academy of Pediatrics clinical reports on the evaluation and treatment of ASD in one publication with an online table of contents and section view available through the American Academy of Pediatrics Gateway to help the reader identify topic areas within the report.

What Drives Detection and Diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder? Looking Under the Hood of a Multi-stage Screening Process in Early Intervention

U.S. guidelines for detecting autism emphasize screening and also incorporate clinical judgment. However, most research focuses on the former. Among 1,654 children participating in a multi-stage screening protocol for autism, we used mixed methods to evaluate: (1) the effectiveness of a clinical decision rule that encouraged further assessment based not only on positive screening results, but also on parent or provider concern, and (2) the influence of shared decision-making on screening administration. Referrals based on concern alone were cost-effective in the current study, and reported concerns were stronger predictors than positive screens of time-to-complete referrals. Qualitative analyses suggest a dynamic relationship between parents' concerns, providers' concerns, and screening results that is central to facilitating shared decision-making and influencing diagnostic assessment.

Toddlers with Autism Spectrum Disorder Can Use Language to Update Their Expectations About the World

This study examined if two-year-olds with ASD can update mental representations on the basis of verbal input. In an eye-tracking study, toddlers with ASD and typically-developing nonverbal age-matched controls were exposed to visual or verbal information about a change in a recently encoded scene, followed by an outcome that was either congruent or incongruent with that information. Findings revealed that both groups looked longer at incongruent outcomes, regardless of information modality, and despite the fact that toddlers with ASD had significantly lower measured verbal abilities than TD toddlers. This demonstrates that, although there is heterogeneity on the individual level, young toddlers with ASD can succeed in updating their mental representations on the basis of verbal input in a low-demand task.

The Developmental Check-In: Development and initial testing of an autism screening tool targeting young children from underserved communities

Children with autism spectrum disorder from low-income, minority families or those with limited English proficiency are diagnosed at a later age, or not at all, compared with their more advantaged peers. The Developmental Check-In is a new tool that could potentially be used to screen for autism that uses pictures to illustrate target behaviors. It was developed to enhance early identification of autism spectrum disorder in low literacy groups. The Developmental Check-In was tested in a sample of 376 children between the ages of 24 and 60 months, from underserved communities. It showed good ability to discriminate autism spectrum disorder from non-autism spectrum disorder (area-under-the-curve = 0.75) across the full age range represented in the sample. Twenty-six of the 28 Developmental Check-In items predicted the presence of autism spectrum disorder. Findings suggest that this pictorial tool may reduce linguistic and health literacy demands when screening for autism among vulnerable populations.

Sensitivity and Specificity of 2 Autism Screeners Among Referred Children Between 16 and 48 Months of Age

OBJECTIVE

Autism screening is recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention at ages 18 and 24 months. Popular screening tests have been validated for the age range of 16 to 30 months. However, only a minority of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are identified by age 3 years, and many are not identified until after they enter school. Thus, we aimed to measure the sensitivity and specificity of 2 available screening tests for ASDs in children older than 30 months.

METHODS

We assessed the sensitivity and specificity of 2 ASD screening tools administered to parents of children who were referred to a developmental clinic between the ages of 16 and 48 months: the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) and the Parent's Observations of Social Interactions (POSI), which is a component of a comprehensive screening instrument called, the Survey of Well-being of Young Children.

RESULTS

Both the M-CHAT and the POSI had acceptable sensitivity (≥75%) among children across the age range studied. Their specificity was limited by the fact that the study was conducted in a developmental referral clinic.

CONCLUSION

Two readily available screening tools, the POSI and the M-CHAT, have acceptable sensitivity in evaluating risk for autism in children at least to age 48 months. Further research should investigate their sensitivity and specificity when used in primary care settings.

The Autism Parent Screen for Infants: Predicting risk of autism spectrum disorder based on parent-reported behavior observed at 6–24 months of age

This study examined whether a novel parent-report questionnaire, the Autism Parent Screen for Infants, could differentiate infants subsequently diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder from a high-risk cohort (siblings of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (n = 66)) from high-risk and low-risk comparison infants (no family history of autism spectrum disorder) who did not develop autism spectrum disorder (n = 138 and 79, respectively). Participants were assessed prospectively at 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, and 24 months of age. At 36 months, a blind independent diagnostic assessment for autism spectrum disorder was completed. Parent report on the Autism Parent Screen for Infants was examined in relation to diagnostic outcome and risk status (i.e. high-risk sibling with autism spectrum disorder, high-risk sibling without autism spectrum disorder, and low-risk control). The results indicated that from 6 months of age, total score on the Autism Parent Screen for Infants differentiated between the siblings with autism spectrum disorder and the other two groups. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive validity of the Autism Parent Screen for Infants highlight its potential for the early screening of autism spectrum disorder in high-risk cohorts.

Evidence-based milestones for surveillance of cognitive, language, and motor development

OBJECTIVE

Fewer than half of the nation's pediatricians conduct systematic surveillance of young children's development. Because time and cost are among the barriers, our objective was to create a brief set of parent-report questions about cognitive, motor, and language milestones that is freely available and can be administered and scored quickly.

METHODS

A team of experts developed candidate items after reviewing existing instruments and prior research. We selected final items based on statistical fit to a graded item response model developed and replicated in separate samples enrolled from primary care settings (n = 469 and 308, respectively). We then developed a 10-item form for each visit on the pediatric periodicity schedule. Combining our initial samples with 395 families enrolled from referral clinics, we tested these forms' concurrent validity with respect to the ASQ-3 and parent reports of developmental diagnoses.

RESULTS

A final set of 54 items displayed adequate fit to our statistical model regardless of race/ethnicity, education level, and child gender. Beginning at 4 months, scores on 10-item forms displayed consistent associations with the ASQ-3, and all but the 60-month form detected parents' reports of developmental delay with adequate sensitivity and specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

The Milestones is one element of the Survey of Well-being of Young Children (SWYC), a brief but comprehensive screening instrument for children under 5 years. The Milestones is a set of evidence-based items with individual normative data that are appropriate for pediatric surveillance. In addition, the scoring of 10-item Milestones forms may provide many advantages of a first level developmental screening instrument.