Development of a school-age extension of the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers through expert consensus and stakeholder input.

LAY ABSTRACT: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends universal screening to identify children at higher likelihood for autism at 18- and 24-month well-child visits. There are many children, however, that are missed during this toddler age who do not get diagnosed until much later in development, delaying access to autism-specific interventions. Currently, brief measures for universal autism screening for school-age children, however, are lacking. In this project, we adapted a commonly used autism screener for toddlers, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised, with Follow-Up (M-CHAT-R/F), to be used for school-age children. This measure, called the M-CHAT-School (M-CHAT-S), is a parent- and teacher-report questionnaire to be used to screen for autism in school-age children aged 4 to 8 years of age. M-CHAT-S was developed through feedback from autism experts, as well as interviews with parents and teachers to provide input on the items. Two versions of M-CHAT-S were developed, one for verbally fluent and one for minimally verbal school-age children. M-CHAT-S is a brief measure, with updated items to reflect changes in the way experts think and talk about autism, making it a useful measure to use for autism screening in elementary aged children. The next steps include further testing to ensure that M-CHAT-S performs well in identifying children with increased likelihood of autism, after which it will be made available to parents, educators, and other professionals.

Role of Primary Care Clinician Concern During Screening for Early Identification of Autism.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the added value of primary care clinician (PCC)-indicated concern during primary care universal standardized screening in early identification of autism. METHODS: Toddlers were screened for autism during primary care checkups (n = 7,039, aged 14.24-22.43 months) in 2 studies. Parents completed the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised, with Follow-Up. For each participant, PCCs indicated whether they had autism concerns (optional in 1 study-before or after viewing screening results, required before viewing screen results in the other). Children at high likelihood for autism from screen result and/or PCC concern (n = 615) were invited for a diagnostic evaluation; 283 children attended the evaluation. RESULTS: Rates of PCC-indicated autism concerns were similar whether PCCs were required or encouraged to indicate concerns. High likelihood of autism indication on both screen and PCC concern resulted in the highest positive predictive value for autism and positive predictive value for any developmental disorder, as well as the highest evaluation attendance, with no significant difference between the positive screen-only and PCC concern-only groups. Although the frequency of PCC-indicated autism concern did not differ significantly based on the child's cognitive level, PCCs were more likely to identify children with more obvious autism characteristics compared with more subtle autism characteristics as having autism. CONCLUSION: The findings support the recommendation of the American Academy of Pediatrics that both screening and surveillance for autism be incorporated into well-child visits. High likelihood of autism on either screen or PCC concern should trigger a referral for an evaluation.

Accuracy of initial diagnostic impressions of autism in toddlers and behaviors that inform these impressions.

Clinicians form initial impressions about a child's diagnosis based on behavioral features, but research has not yet identified specific behaviors to guide initial diagnostic impressions. Participants were toddlers (N = 55, mean age 22.9 months) from a multi-site early detection study, referred for concern for ASD due to screening or parent/provider concern. Within 5 min of meeting a child, clinicians noted ASD or non-ASD impression, confidence in impression, and behaviors that informed their impression. These clinicians also determined final diagnoses for each child. When a child's final diagnosis was ASD (n = 35), senior clinicians formed an initial impression of ASD in 22 cases (63%) but missed 13 cases (37%). When final diagnosis was non-ASD (n = 20), senior clinicians made an initial impression of non-ASD in all cases (100%). Results were similar among junior clinicians. Senior and junior clinicians used the same behaviors to form accurate impressions of ASD and non-ASD: social reciprocity, nonverbal communication, and eye contact. Senior clinicians additionally used focus of attention when forming accurate impressions of ASD and non-ASD; junior clinicians used this behavior only when forming accurate non-ASD impressions. Clinicians' initial impressions of ASD are very likely to be consistent with final diagnoses, but initial impressions of non-ASD need follow-up. Toddlers who show all four atypical behaviors (social reciprocity, nonverbal communication, eye contact, and focus of attention) might receive expedited ASD diagnoses. However, presence of apparently typical behaviors should not rule out ASD; for some children a longer evaluation is necessary to allow for more opportunities to observe subtle social behavior.

Initial diagnostic impressions of trainees during autism evaluations: High specificity but low sensitivity.

Reducing the age of first autism diagnosis facilitates access to critical early intervention services. A current "waitlist crisis" for autism diagnostic evaluation thus demands that we consider novel use of available clinical resources. Previous work has found that expert autism clinicians can identify autism in young children with high specificity after only a brief observation; rapid identification by non-experts remains untested. In the current study, 252 children ages 12-53 months presented for a comprehensive autism diagnostic evaluation. We found that junior clinicians in training to become autism specialists (n = 29) accurately determined whether or not a young child would be diagnosed with autism in the first five minutes of the clinic visit in 75% of cases. Specificity of brief observations was high (0.92), suggesting that brief observations may be an effective tool for triaging young children toward autism-specific interventions. In contrast, the lower negative predictive value (0.71) of brief observations, suggest that they should not be used to rule out autism. When trainees expressed more confidence in their initial impression, their impression was more likely to match the final diagnosis. These findings add to a body of literature showing that clinical observations of suspected autism should be taken seriously, but lack of clinician concern should not be used to rule out autism or overrule other indicators of likely autism, such as parent concern or a positive screening result.

Sex differences in early autism screening using the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised, with Follow-Up (M-CHAT-R/F).

LAY ABSTRACT: This study examined a widely used autism screening tool, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised, with Follow-Up to identify differences in screening for autism between toddler males and females. Examining sex differences in screening for autism in toddlerhood is important as it determines who will be referred for evaluations and receive diagnoses, which is critical for access to autism-specific early intervention. This study found that females were less likely to screen positive and be invited for evaluations compared with males. Females at high likelihood for autism were less likely to be diagnosed with autism, which decreases confidence in the screener's results. Importantly, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised, with Follow-Up accurately identified both males and females with autism. Future research should examine ways to improve accuracy in screening results for females.

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.

Addressing current barriers to autism diagnoses through a tiered diagnostic approach involving pediatric primary care providers.

Formal autism diagnosis from a specialist trained in autism assessment is customary prior to a child accessing early, intensive autism-specific services. However, long wait lists for diagnostic evaluations and limited specialty workforce have created substantial delays. Additionally, lengthy multidisciplinary evaluations are costly to insurers, inconvenient to families, and disproportionally impact under-resourced families. Diagnostic delays can impede access to intervention services. These barriers, combined with evidence regarding the importance of receiving early, autism-specific treatment, demand new approaches enabling access to autism specific services before comprehensive evaluation. Pediatric primary care providers (PCPs) are often the only health care professionals with whom a family interacts during early childhood and can play a crucial role in helping children with autism symptoms access services. Many strategies for autism diagnosis in primary care are being developed and tested; however, they have yet to be broadly adopted by PCPs, primarily due to critical implementation barriers in primary care settings. There is also not enough evidence on the accuracy of PCPs' diagnostic impressions without extensive specialty support, resulting in PCP hesitancy in diagnosing ASD, as well as family and service provider hesitancy in accepting a PCP autism diagnosis. In this commentary, we explore the acute need for shortening waitlists for autism evaluations through a tiered diagnostic approach, in which PCPs can rule in or rule out autism in children, for whom diagnosis is clear, and refer more complex cases for specialist evaluations, and explore implementation challenges to this approach.

Applying a public health approach to autism research: A framework for action.

Most published autism research, and the funding that supports it, remains focused on basic and clinical science. However, the public health impact of autism drives a compelling argument for utilizing a public health approach to autism research. Fundamental to the public health perspective is a focus on health determinants to improve quality of life and to reduce the potential for adverse outcomes across the general population, including in vulnerable subgroups. While the public health research process can be conceptualized as a linear, 3-stage path consisting of discovery - testing - translation/dissemination/implementation, in this paper we propose an integrated, cyclical research framework to advance autism public health objectives in a more comprehensive manner. This involves discovery of primary, secondary and tertiary determinants of health in autism; and use of this evidence base to develop and test detection, intervention, and dissemination strategies and the means to implement them in 'real world' settings. The proposed framework serves to facilitate identification of knowledge gaps, translational barriers, and shortfalls in implementation; guides an iterative research cycle; facilitates purposeful integration of stakeholders and interdisciplinary researchers; and may yield more efficient achievement of improved health and well-being among persons on the autism spectrum at the population-level. LAY SUMMARY: Scientists need better ways to identify and address gaps in autism research, conduct research with stakeholders, and use findings to improve the lives of autistic people. We recommend an approach, based in public health science, to guide research in ways that might impact lives more quickly.

Primary Care Clinician and Child Characteristics Impacting Autism Surveillance.

Early detection of autism provides access to early intervention and subsequently fewer lifelong challenges. However, disparities in screening have been associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and race, and disparities in surveillance have been associated with clinician knowledge and beliefs about autism identification. The present study examines associations between demographic variables and clinician beliefs, and agreement between screening results and clinician surveillance. Surveillance included activities used by the primary care clinicians (PCCs) to assess risk for autism. PCCs reported their beliefs about autism screening and identification, their sex, race, years in practice, and racial distribution of their patient population. Children's demographic information was also collected. PCCs identified children as having, or not having, an increased likelihood of autism, and parents of children completed an autism screener. Agreement between screening and surveillance results were examined across PCC, practice, and child demographics. Higher confidence in autism knowledge and screening resources, female PCC sex, and majority White practice patient demographics all predicted agreement between screening and surveillance. Female child sex and higher maternal education also predicted agreement between screening and surveillance. These findings highlight the importance of PCC screening beliefs and child and PCC demographics on the autism identification process.

Effect of Brief Training to Identify Autism Spectrum Disorder During Toddler Well-Child Care Visits.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of a brief Enhanced training using the information-motivation-behavior (IMB) change model on improving providers' surveillance rates and accuracy of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) detection. METHOD: Toddlers (n = 5,672) were screened for ASD during their pediatric well-child visits. Pediatric providers (n = 120) were randomized to receive Enhanced (incorporating components of the IMB model) or Control training. Providers indicated whether they had an ASD concern at each well-child visit. Toddlers who were positive on any screener and/or whose provider indicated ASD concern were invited for a diagnostic evaluation. Differences in provider-indicated ASD concerns before and after training were evaluated using log-linear analyses. RESULTS: The Enhanced training did not have a significant effect on provider-endorsed ASD concerns (p = 0.615) or accuracy of endorsing concerns (p = 0.619). Providers in the Control training showed a significant reduction in indicating whether or not they had concerns after the training (from 71.9% to 64.3%), which did not occur in the Enhanced group. The Enhanced training led to more frequent endorsements of language (χ2 = 8.772, p = 0.003) and restricted and repetitive behavior (χ2 = 7.918, p = 0.005) concerns for children seen after training. CONCLUSION: Provider training had limited impact on ASD surveillance, indicating the importance of using formal screening instruments that rely on parent report during well-child visits to complement developmental surveillance. Future research should examine whether providers who indicate specific concerns are more likely to accurately refer children for ASD evaluations.

The first five minutes: Initial impressions during autism spectrum disorder diagnostic evaluations in young children.

Diagnosticians report that autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is immediately apparent in some, but not all, children ultimately diagnosed. Clinicians' initial diagnostic impressions have implications for ASD early detection, yet the literature raises questions about their accuracy. This study explores diagnostic impressions of ASD specialists made within the first 5 minutes of meeting a young child and investigates factors associated with the match between initial impressions and final diagnoses. Participants were children (n = 294, aged 12-53 months) referred for an ASD evaluation as part of multi-site ASD screening studies. After 5 minutes observing each child, clinicians with expertise diagnosing ASD recorded if they thought the child would meet criteria for ASD following a complete evaluation, and recorded their confidence in this impression. Clinicians' initial impressions matched the final diagnosis in 81% of cases. Ninety-two percent of cases initially thought to have ASD met criteria following a full evaluation; however, 24% of cases initially thought not to have ASD also met criteria, suggesting a high miss rate. Clinicians were generally confident in their initial impressions, reporting highest confidence for children initially thought correctly not to have ASD. ASD behavioral presentation, but not demographic characteristics or developmental level, were associated with matching initial impression and final diagnosis, and confidence. Brief observations indicating ASD should trigger referral to intervention services, but are likely to under-detect positive cases and should not be used to rule out ASD, highlighting the need to incorporate information beyond initial clinical impression. LAY SUMMARY: When children come in for an autism evaluation, clinicians often form early impressions-before doing any formal testing-about whether the child has autism. We studied how often these early impressions match the final diagnosis, and found that clinicians could not easily rule out autism (many children who initially appeared not to have autism were ultimately diagnosed), but were generally accurate ruling in autism (when a child appeared to have autism within 5 minutes, they were almost always so diagnosed).

Early and Repeated Screening Detects Autism Spectrum Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate timing and accuracy of early and repeated screening for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) during well-child visits. STUDY DESIGN: Using a longitudinal study design, toddlers (n = 5784) were initially screened at 12 (n = 1504), 15 (n = 1228), or 18 (n = 3052) months during well-child visits, and rescreened at 18, 24, and 36 months. Of those screened, 368 toddlers attended an ASD evaluation after a positive screen and/or a provider concern for ASD at any visit. RESULTS: Screens initiated at 12 months yielded an ASD diagnosis significantly earlier than at 15 months (P = .003, d = 0.99) and 18 months (P < .001, d = 0.97). Cross-group overall sensitivity of the initial screen was .715 and specificity was .959. Repeat screening improves sensitivity (82.1%), without notably decreasing specificity (all >93.5%). Screening at 18 months resulted in significantly higher positive predictive value than at 12 months (X2 (1, n = 221) = 9.87, P = .002, OR = 2.60) and 15 months (X2 (1, n = 208) = 14.57, P < .001, OR = 3.67). With repeat screening, positive predictive value increased for all screen groups, but the increase was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Screening as early as 12 months effectively identifies many children at risk for ASD. Children screened at 12 months receive a diagnosis of ASD significantly earlier than peers who are first screened at later ages, facilitating earlier intervention. However, as the sensitivity is lower for a single screen, screening needs to be repeated.

Measuring change in facial emotion recognition in individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review.

LAY ABSTRACT: Children and adults with autism spectrum disorder show difficulty recognizing facial emotions in others, which makes social interaction challenging. While there are many treatments developed to improve facial emotion recognition, there is no agreement on the best way to measure such abilities in individuals with autism spectrum disorder. The purpose of this review is to examine studies that were published between January 1998 and November 2019 and have measured change in facial emotion recognition to evaluate the effectiveness of different treatments. Our search yielded 65 studies, and within these studies, 36 different measures were used to evaluate facial emotion recognition in individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Only six of these measures, however, were used in different studies and by different investigators. In this review, we summarize the different measures and outcomes of the studies, in order to identify promising assessment tools and inform future research.

Gender Differences in Emotion Dysregulation in an Autism Inpatient Psychiatric Sample.

There is a wide range of emotion regulation (ER)-related impairment observed in autism spectrum disorder (ASD), which is associated with both internalizing and externalizing problems. Although the importance of ER is widely acknowledged in the ASD literature, little is known about factors associated with variability in ER impairment. Given the identified gender differences in ASD, gender may be a potential contributor to ER. This study examined gender differences in ER in an ASD inpatient psychiatric sample (n = 722; 146 females) aged 4-20 years, collected as part of the Autism Inpatient Collection. In addition, the study investigated whether age, nonverbal intelligence quotient (NVIQ), or verbal ability moderate the association between ER and gender. While both male and female inpatients with ASD presented with clinically elevated emotion dysregulation compared to general population norms, results suggest that female psychiatric inpatients have more severe dysregulation, including higher reactivity and dysphoria, than inpatient males. NVIQ and verbal ability did not moderate the association between gender and ER. Age moderated the association between gender and ER, with greater gender difference seen in older individuals, but only for dysphoria. However, overall, these effects were small. Improved understanding of ER presentation in males and females with ASD is critical, as these symptoms may differentially impact individuals with ASD and may warrant a different treatment emphasis. LAY SUMMARY: Previous research has identified several gender differences in presentation of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms, as well as difficulties with emotion regulation in individuals with ASD. In order to better understand the factors that may contribute to emotion regulation in ASD, this study examined whether psychiatrically hospitalized males and females with ASD differed in emotion regulation and what factors influenced the differences. Results suggest that females with ASD have slightly but significantly more difficulty with emotion regulation compared to males. Autism Res 2020, 13: 1343-1348. © 2020 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Attention Modification to Attenuate Facial Emotion Recognition Deficits in Children with Autism: A Pilot Study.

Diminished attending to faces may contribute to the impairments in emotion recognition and expression in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The current study evaluated the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of an attention modification intervention designed to attenuate deficits in facial emotion recognition (FER). During the 10-session experimental treatment, children (n = 8) with ASD watched dynamic videos of people expressing different emotions with the facial features highlighted to guide children's attention. Children and their parents generally rated the treatment as acceptable and helpful. Although FER improvement was not apparent on task-based measures, parents reported slight improvements and decreased socioemotional problems following treatment. Results suggest that further research on visual attention retraining for ASD, within an experimental therapeutic program, may be promising.

Group Differences in Facial Emotion Expression in Autism: Evidence for the Utility of Machine Classification.

Effective social communication relies, in part, on accurate nonverbal expression of emotion. To evaluate the nature of facial emotion expression (FEE) deficits in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), we compared 20 youths with ASD to a sample of typically developing (TD) youth (n = 20) using a machine-based classifier of FEE. Results indicate group differences in FEE for overall accuracy across emotions. In particular, a significant group difference in accuracy of FEE was observed when participants were prompted by a video of a human expressing an emotion, F(2, 36) = 4.99, p = .032, η2 = .12. Specifically, youth with ASD made significantly more errors in FEE relative to TD youth. Findings support continued refinement of machine-based approaches to assess and potentially remediate FEE impairment in youth with ASD.

Change in gaze-based attention bias in adolescents with Social Anxiety Disorder.

Although attention bias (AB) toward threat has been associated with Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD), concerns regarding the ability of current measures to detect change in AB following treatment exist. We sought to examine change in bias, as measured via eye-tracking, in adolescents with SAD receiving either attention-bias modification training (ABMT) or attention-control training (ACT). Gaze-based AB was associated (r = -0.361) with symptoms of social anxiety prior to treatment, whereas there was no association between bias as measured via dot probe and social anxiety. Moreover, gaze-based bias to same-age face stimuli showed change following treatment. Large effects are seen for condition (ABMT or ACT) and for time, independent of treatment condition, in gaze-based AB to same-age stimuli. Findings suggest that further research on gaze-based bias, to assess stability over time outside of treatment and sensitivity to change following intervention, is warranted.

Attention Bias Modification Treatment for Adolescents With Social Anxiety Disorder.

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) tends to emerge during the early teenage years and is particularly refractory to change even when standard evidence-based CBT treatments are delivered. Efforts have been made to develop novel, mechanistic-driven interventions for this disorder. In the present study, we examined Attention Bias Modification Treatment (ABMT) for youth with SAD. Participants were 58 adolescents (mean age = 14.29 years) who met diagnostic criteria for SAD and who were randomized to ABMT or a placebo control condition, Attention Control Training (ACT). We predicted that ABMT would result in greater changes in both threat biases and social anxiety symptoms. We also explored potential moderators of change including the severity of social anxiety symptoms, the level of threat bias at pretreatment, and the degree of temperament-defined attention control. Contrary to our hypotheses, changes in attention bias were not observed in either condition, changes in social anxiety symptoms and diagnosis were small, and significant differences were not observed between the ABMT and ACT conditions. Little support for the proposed moderators was obtained. Reasons for our failure to find support for ABMT and its potential moderators are explored and recommendations for changes in the ABMT paradigm are suggested.