A Comparison Between Two Screening Approaches for ASD Among Toddlers in Israel

The Impact of Using Standardized Autism Screening on Referral to Specialist Evaluation for Young Children on the Autism Spectrum: A Cluster-Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

We tested whether the implementation of standardized, high-fidelity screening for autism during routine well-child check-ups results in the following: increasing the number of children with suspected autism referred to diagnostic evaluation; lowering the age at which they are referred; and facilitating autism diagnosis for children across a more diverse range of demographic backgrounds and clinical presentations, including those with subtle manifestations.

METHOD

As part of a multi-site cluster randomized trial, pediatric practices were randomly assigned to an experimental condition involving training and supervision in the universal, standardized, high-fidelity implementation of the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised with Follow-Up (M-CHAT-R/F), or a usual care condition. Children in both conditions identified as having a high likelihood of autism during well-child visits were referred to a diagnostic evaluation conducted by clinicians naive to referral source.

RESULTS

Children referred to the diagnostic evaluation from the practices in the experimental condition were more numerous (n = 186) and younger (mean age = 20.65 months) than those referred from the practices in the usual care condition (n = 39; mean age = 23.58 months). Children referred by experimental practices who received an autism diagnosis had milder clinical presentations across measures of cognitive, language, adaptive, and social-communication functioning, compared to those referred from usual care practices. Demographic characteristics were similar across groups.

CONCLUSION

Standardized, high-fidelity implementation of autism screening during pediatric well-child visits facilitates the identification of children with high autism likelihood at a younger age, including those presenting with more subtle clinical manifestations.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

Promoting Positive Outcomes for Individuals With ASD: Linking Early Detection, Treatment, and Long-term Outcomes; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT03333629.

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.

Screening and diagnostic tools for autism spectrum disorder: Systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a heterogeneous neurodevelopmental disorder, with main manifestations related to communication, social interaction, and behavioral patterns. The slight dynamics of change in the child over time require that the onset of clinical manifestations presented by the child be more valued, with the aim of stabilizing the condition. Faced with a variety of methods for diagnosing ASD, the question arises as to which method should be used. This systematic review aims to recommend the best tools to perform screening and diagnosis.

METHODOLOGY

This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines. The databases MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane), and Lilacs were accessed, and gray and manual searches were performed. The search strategy was created with terms referring to autism and the diagnosis/broad filter. The studies were qualitatively evaluated and quantitatively. Statistical analysis was performed using Meta-diSc-2.0 software, the confidence interval was 95 %.

RESULTS

The M-CHAT-R/F tool demonstrated a sensitivity of 78 % (95 % CI 0.57‒0.91) and specificity of 0.98 (95 % CI 0.88-1.00). The diagnostic tools demonstrated sensitivity and specificity respectively of: ADOS, sensitivity of 87 % (95 % CI 0.79‒0.92) and specificity 75 % (95 % CI 0.73‒0.78); ADI-R demonstrated test sensitivity of 77 % (95 % CI 0.56‒0.90) and specificity 68 % (95 % CI 0.52‒0.81), CARS test sensitivity was 89 % (95 % CI 0.78‒0.95) and specificity 79 % (95 % CI 0.65‒0.88).

CONCLUSION

It is mandatory to apply a screening test, the most recommended being the M-CHAT-R/F. For diagnosis CARS and ADOS are the most recommended tools.

Screening for Autism Spectrum Disorder in Young Children: Still Not Enough Evidence

BACKGROUND

Early detection of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has the potential to significantly reduce the impact of the condition, however previous reviews have found little evidence to support screening programs for ASD in young children.

METHODS

We conducted a review with the aim of updating evidence on 3 aspects: (a) diagnostic stability of ASD in young children; (b) accuracy of ASD screening tools in young children; and (c) the benefits of early interventions in screen-detected young children with ASD.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies were included in our review. Five studies looking at diagnostic stability reported estimates ranging from 71.9% to 100%, however the majority only included a follow-up of 24 months and all studies raised concerns regarding the risk of bias due particularly to lack of blinding, sample size, and patient flow. A total of 25 studies, reported in 26 articles, were identified that reported accuracy data on 11 screening tools. Most of the reports were concerned with versions of M-CHAT, reporting sensitivity estimates from 0.67 to 1.0; however, many of these were deemed to be of high risk of bias due to lack of blinding and follow-up. Four studies reported on early interventions in screen-detected children; however, the majority did not find significant improvements on the relevant outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the evidence on screening for ASD in young children captured by this review is not conclusive regarding the 3 aspects of screening in this population. Future studies should attempt to ensure blinded diagnostic assessments, include longer follow-up periods and limit attrition.

Association Between Early Developmental Milestones and Autism Spectrum Disorder

Early diagnosis and treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been shown to lead to better prognosis. Here, we examined the association of commonly measured early developmental milestones (DMs) with later diagnosis of ASD. We conducted a case-control study of 280 children with ASD (cases) and 560 typically developed children (controls) matched to cases by date of birth, sex, and ethnicity in a control/case ratio of 2:1. Both cases and controls were ascertained from all children whose development was monitored at mother-child health clinics (MCHCs) in southern Israel. DM failure rates during the first 18 months of life in three developmental categories (motor, social, and verbal) were compared between cases and controls. Conditional logistic regression models were used to assess the independent association of specific DMs with the risk of ASD, while adjusting for demographic and birth characteristics.Significant case-control differences in DM failure rates were observed as early as 3 months of age (p < 0.001), and these differences increased with age. Specifically, cases were 2.4 times more likely to fail ≥ 1 DM at 3 months (aOR = 2.39; 95%CI = 1.41-4.06), and 15.3 times more likely to fail ≥ 3 DMs at 18 months (aOR = 15.32; 95%CI = 7.75-30.28). The most notable DM-ASD association was observed for social DM failure at 9-12 months (aOR = 4.59; 95%CI = 2.59-8.13). Importantly, the sex or ethnicity of the participants did not affect these DM-ASD associations. Our findings highlight the potential role of DMs as early signs of ASD that could facilitate earlier referral and diagnosis of ASD.

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.

Tools for early screening of autism spectrum disorders in primary health care - a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder that manifests itself in early childhood. Early diagnosis of these disorders allows for the initiation of early therapy, which is crucial for the child's further functioning in society.

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to gather and present the existing ASD screening tools that can be used in primary care and adapted to different countries conditions linguistically and culturally.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

We searched for English-language publications on ASD screening tools for children aged 0-3 years suitable for use in primary care (i.e. free, requiring no additional training or qualifications).

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

Four databases were explored to find English studies on ASD screening tools intended for the rapid assessment of children aged 0-3.

CHARTING METHODS

The information sought (specific features of the questionnaires relevant to primary health care workers, psychometric and diagnostic values of a given cultural adaptation of screening tools, and the linguistic and cultural changes made) were extracted and collected to create profiles of these tools.

RESULTS

We found 81 studies which met inclusion criteria and underwent full data extraction. Three additional data sources were included. These allowed to create 75 profiles of adaptations for 26 different screening tools and collect data on their psychometric values and characteristic features.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study indicate the availability of several diagnostic tools for early ASD screening in primary care setting concordant culturally and linguistically with a given population. They could be an effective method of accelerating the diagnostic process and starting personalized therapy faster. However, most tools have significant limitations - some are only available for research purposes, while others do not have scientific evidence to prove their effectiveness.