Sustainability of an early detection program for autism spectrum disorder over the course of 8 years

Social COmmunication Program supported by E-health (SCOPE) for infants and toddlers at elevated likelihood of autism spectrum disorder: study design of a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Although the importance of early detection and early intervention of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is widely recognized, multiple barriers exist in accessing early intervention services. As an alternative to these barriers, the SCOPE project presents a new, easy accessible and blended intervention called BEAR (Blended E-health for children at eArly Risk). This paper describes this BEAR intervention and study design of an ongoing two arm cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS

BEAR (Blended E-health for children at eArly Risk) is a blended e-health intervention, based on evidence-based naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions (NDBI's) and can be offered to parents and infants/toddlers at high likelihood for ASD. During the ongoing RCT, N = 88 high risk infants and toddlers will be cluster randomized over the BEAR intervention and care-as-usual (CAU) conditions. The finalized version of the intervention protocol and study design are presented in this paper. The primary outcome measure is joint engagement measured by the Joint Engagement Rating Inventory (JERI) during videotaped parent-child interaction. Secondary outcome measures include severity of ASD symptoms, global level of adaptive functioning, parental well-being, parental skills and satisfaction with healthcare. Also, costs will be estimated from society's perspective. Assessments take place at the start of the study (T1), after eight weeks (T2) and after six months (T3) and include behavioral home observations and parental questionnaires.

DISCUSSION

The SCOPE project aims to contribute to improved early identification and timely start of suitable interventions for infants and toddlers at elevated likelihood for ASD. This ongoing RCT will offer insight in the feasibility, short-term and six months effects of the innovative BEAR intervention. It is estimated that inclusion for the trial (N = 88) is completed in spring 2023.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch Trial Register, NTR7695. Registered at December 17^th, 2018, www.trialregister.nl .

Protective Effects of Bee Pollen on Multiple Propionic Acid-Induced Biochemical Autistic Features in a Rat Model

Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) are neurodevelopmental disorders that clinically presented as impaired social interaction, repetitive behaviors, and weakened communication. The use of bee pollen as a supplement rich in amino acids amino acids, vitamins, lipids, and countless bioactive substances may lead to the relief of oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, glutamate excitotoxicity, and impaired neurochemistry as etiological mechanisms autism. Thirty young male Western albino rats were randomly divided as: Group I-control; Group II, in which autism was induced by the oral administration of 250 mg propionic acid/kg body weight/day for three days followed by orally administered saline until the end of experiment and Group III, the bee pollen-treated group, in which the rats were treated with 250 mg/kg body weight of bee pollen for four weeks before autism was induced as described for Group II. Markers related to oxidative stress, apoptosis, inflammation, glutamate excitotoxicity, and neurochemistry were measured in the brain tissue. Our results indicated that while glutathione serotonin, dopamine, gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), GABA/Glutamate ratio, and vitamin C were significantly reduced in propionic acid-treated group (p < 0.05), glutamate, IFN-γ, IL-1A, IL-6, caspase-3, and lipid peroxide levels were significantly elevated (p < 0.05). Bee pollen supplementation demonstrates protective potency presented as amelioration of most of the measured variables with significance range between (p < 0.05)−(p < 0.001).

Autism Spectrum Disorder Alertness in Dutch Youth and Family Center Physicians: Effects of a Live Online Educational Program

We investigated the effect of a live online educational program in 93 Dutch Youth and Family Center (YFC) physicians who were screening for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in the general child population. The educational program raised the physicians' level of specific ASD knowledge and it remained higher at six months follow-up (p < .01). Their self-confidence in detecting ASD was also higher and maintained at follow-up (p < .01). The educational program had no effect on the physicians' stigmatizing attitudes toward mental illness nor on the number of potential ASD referrals in children of 4-6 years of age. In conclusion, the online educational program on early detection of ASD has a six month long effect on YFC physicians' level of ASD knowledge and self-confidence.

Autism Screening in Early Childhood: Discriminating Autism From Other Developmental Concerns

Early identification of autism, followed by appropriate intervention, has the potential to improve outcomes for autistic individuals. Numerous screening instruments have been developed for children under 3 years of age. Level 1 screeners are used in large-scale screening to detect at-risk children in the general population; Level 2 screeners are concerned with distinguishing children with signs of autism from those with other developmental problems. The focus here is evaluation of Level 2 screeners. However, given the contributions of Level 1 screeners and the necessity to understand how they might interface with Level 2 screeners, we briefly review Level 1 screeners and consider instrument characteristics and system variables that may constrain their effectiveness. The examination of Level 2 screeners focuses on five instruments associated with published evaluations in peer-reviewed journals. Key criteria encompass the traditional indices of test integrity such as test reliability (inter-rater, test-retest) and construct validity, including concurrent and predictive validity, sensitivity (SE), and specificity (SP). These evaluations reveal limitations, including inadequate sample sizes, reliability issues, and limited involvement of independent researchers. Also lacking are comparative test evaluations under standardized conditions, hindering interpretation of differences in discriminative performance across instruments. Practical considerations constraining the use of such instruments—such as the requirements for training in test administration and test administration time—are canvassed. Published Level 2 screener short forms are reviewed and, as a consequence of that evaluation, future directions for assessing the discriminative capacity of items and measures are suggested. Suggested priorities for future research include targeting large and diverse samples to permit robust appraisals of Level 2 items and scales across the 12–36 month age range, a greater focus on precise operationalization of items and response coding to enhance reliability, ongoing exploration of potentially discriminating items at the younger end of the targeted age range, and trying to unravel the complexities of developmental trajectories in autistic infants. Finally, we emphasize the importance of understanding how screening efficacy is dependent on clinicians' and researchers' ability not only to develop screening tests but also to negotiate the complex organizational systems within which screening procedures must be implemented.