Remote Delivery of Allied and Behavioral Healthcare During COVID-19 for Children With Developmental Disabilities.

Objective: Many children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and other developmental disabilities (DD) transitioned to telehealth services due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our objectives were to describe reductions in allied and behavioral healthcare services and receipt of caregiver training to deliver services at home because of COVID-19 for children with ASD and other DD, and factors associated with worse response to remote delivery of services for children with ASD. Method: Prior to the pandemic, children 2 to 5 years of age were enrolled in a multi-site case-control study and completed a developmental assessment. Caregivers completed questionnaires on child behavior problems and ASD symptoms. Children were classified as having ASD vs another DD based on standardized diagnostic measures. Subsequently, caregivers completed a survey during January to June 2021 to assess how COVID-19 affected children and families. Results: Caregivers reported that most children with ASD and other DD had a decrease in service hours (50.0%-76.9% by service type) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children with ASD were significantly more likely to experience reduced speech/language therapy than children with other DD. Receipt of caregiver training to deliver services at home ranged from 38.1% to 57.4% by service type. Among children with ASD, pre-pandemic problems with internalizing behaviors and social communication/interaction were associated with worse response to behavioral telehealth but no other common therapies. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates the caregiver-reported impacts of COVID-19 on remote delivery of allied and behavioral healthcare services for children with ASD and other DD. Considerations for caregiver support and remote delivery of services are provided.

Health Conditions, Education Services, and Transition Planning for Adolescents With Autism.

OBJECTIVE: Our objectives with this study were to describe the frequency of selected cooccurring health conditions and individualized education program (IEP) services and post-high school transition planning for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder and identify disparities by sex, intellectual ability, race or ethnicity, and geographic area. METHODS: The study sample included 1787 adolescents born in 2004 who were identified as having autism through a health and education record review through age 16 years in 2020. These adolescents were part of a longitudinal population-based surveillance birth cohort from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network from 2004 to 2020 in 5 US catchment areas. RESULTS: Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (47%) and anxiety (39%) were the most common cooccurring health conditions. Anxiety was less commonly identified for those with intellectual disability than those without. It was also less commonly identified among Black adolescents compared with White or Hispanic adolescents. There was wide variation across Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network sites in the provision of school-based IEP services. Students with intellectual disability were less likely to receive school-based mental health services and more likely to have a goal for postsecondary independent living skills compared with those without intellectual disability. A total of 37% of students did not participate in standardized testing. CONCLUSIONS: We identified disparities in the identification of cooccurring conditions and school-based IEP services, practices, and transition planning. Working with pediatric health and education providers, families, and adolescents with autism will be important to identify contributing factors and to focus efforts to reduce disparities in the supports and services adolescents with autism have access to and receive.

Racial and ethnic disparities in the co-occurrence of intellectual disability and autism: Impact of incorporating measures of adaptive functioning.

Intellectual disability (ID) commonly co-occurs in children with autism. Although diagnostic criteria for ID require impairments in both cognitive and adaptive functioning, most population-based estimates of the frequency of co-occurring ID in children with autism-including studies of racial and ethnic disparities in co-occurring autism and ID-base the definition of ID solely on cognitive scores. The goal of this analysis was to examine the effect of including both cognitive and adaptive behavior criteria on estimates of co-occurring ID in a well-characterized sample of 2- to 5-year-old children with autism. Participants included 3264 children with research or community diagnoses of autism enrolled in the population-based Study to Explore Early Development (SEED) phases 1-3. Based only on Mullen Scales of Early Learning (MSEL) composite cognitive scores, 62.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 61.1, 64.7%) of children with autism were estimated to have co-occurring ID. After incorporating Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Second Edition (VABS-II) composite or domains criteria, co-occurring ID estimates were reduced to 38.0% (95% CI: 36.2, 39.8%) and 45.0% (95% CI: 43.1, 46.9%), respectively. The increased odds of meeting ID criteria observed for non-Hispanic (NH) Black and Hispanic children relative to NH White children when only MSEL criteria were used were substantially reduced, though not eliminated, after incorporating VABS-II criteria and adjusting for selected socioeconomic variables. This study provides evidence for the importance of considering adaptive behavior as well as socioeconomic disadvantage when describing racial and ethnic disparities in co-occurring ID in epidemiologic studies of autism.

Health and Education Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Young Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Other Developmental Disabilities.

OBJECTIVE: Understanding how the COVID-19 pandemic affected children with disabilities is essential for future public health emergencies. We compared children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with those with another developmental disability (DD) and from the general population (POP) regarding (1) missed or delayed appointments for regular health/dental services, immunizations, and specialty services; (2) reasons for difficulty accessing care; and (3) use of remote learning and school supports. METHOD: Caregivers of children previously enrolled in the Study to Explore Early Development, a case-control study of children with ASD implemented during 2017 to 2020, were recontacted during January-June 2021 to learn about services during March-December 2020. Children were classified as ASD, DD, or POP during the initial study and were aged 3.4 to 7.5 years when their caregivers were recontacted during the pandemic. RESULTS: Over half of all children missed or delayed regular health/dental appointments (58.4%-65.2%). More children in the ASD versus DD and POP groups missed or delayed specialty services (75.7%, 58.3%, and 22.8%, respectively) and reported difficulties obtaining care of any type because of issues using telehealth and difficulty wearing a mask. During school closures, a smaller proportion of children with ASD versus another DD were offered live online classes (84.3% vs 91.1%), while a larger proportion had disrupted individualized education programs (50.0% vs 36.2%). CONCLUSION: Minimizing service disruptions for all children and ensuring continuity of specialty care for children with ASD is essential for future public health emergencies. Children may need additional services to compensate for disruptions during the pandemic.

Economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on families of children with autism and other developmental disabilities.

Background: To control the spread of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), many jurisdictions throughout the world enacted public health measures that had vast socio-economic implications. In emergency situations, families of children with developmental disabilities (DDs), including autism, may experience increased difficulty accessing therapies, economic hardship, and caregiver stress, with the potential to exacerbate autism symptoms. Yet, limited research exists on the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on families of children with autism or another DD compared to families of children from the general population. Objectives: To assess impact of the COVID-19 pandemic related to parental employment and economic difficulties in families of children with autism, another DD, and in the general population, considering potential modification by socioeconomic disadvantage before the pandemic and levels of child behavioral and emotional problems. Methods: The Study to Explore Early Development (SEED) is a multi-site, multi-phase, case-control study of young children with autism or another DD as compared to a population comparison group (POP). During January-July 2021, a COVID-19 Impact Assessment Questionnaire was sent to eligible participants (n=1,789) who had enrolled in SEED Phase 3 from September 2017-March 2020. Parents completed a questionnaire on impacts of the pandemic in 2020 and completed the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) to measure behavioral and emotional health of their child during this time. Multiple logistic regression models were built for employment reduction, increased remote work, difficulty paying bills, or fear of losing their home. Covariates include group status (autism, DD, POP), household income at enrollment, child's race and ethnicity, and binary CBCL Total Problems T-score (<60 vs. ≥60). Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. Results: The study included 274 children with autism, 368 children with another DD, and 385 POP children. The mean age of 6.1 years (standard deviation, 0.8) at the COVID-19 Impact Assessment did not differ between study groups. Parents of children with autism were less likely to transition to remote work (aOR [95% CI] = 0.6 [0.4, 1.0]) and more likely to report difficulty paying bills during the pandemic (1.8 [1.2, 2.9]) relative to parents of POP children. Lower income was associated with greater employment reduction, difficulty paying bills, and fear of losing their home, but inversely associated with transitioning to remote work. Parents of non-Hispanic (NH) Black children experienced greater employment reduction compared to parents of NH White children (1.9 [1.1, 3.0]). Parents from racial and ethnic minority groups were more likely to experience difficulty paying bills and fear losing their home, relative to NH White parents. Caregivers of children with CBCL scores in the clinical range were more likely to fear losing their home (2.1 [1.3, 3.4]). Conclusion: These findings suggest that families of children with autism, families of lower socio-economic status, and families of racial and ethnic minority groups experienced fewer work flexibilities and greater financial distress during the pandemic. Future research can be used to assess if these impacts are sustained over time.

Using adaptive behavior scores to convey level of functioning in children with autism spectrum disorder: Evidence from the Study to Explore Early Development.

LAY ABSTRACT: Autistic people are often described as "low-" or "high-functioning" based on their scores on cognitive tests. These terms are common in publications and in everyday communication. However, recent research and feedback from the autistic community suggests that relying on cognitive ability alone to describe functioning may miss meaningful differences in the abilities of autistic children and adults and in the kinds of support they may need. Additional methods are needed to describe "functioning" in autistic children. We examined whether scores from a test measuring adaptive behaviors would provide information on the functional abilities of children with autism that is different from cognitive ability and autism symptom severity. Adaptive behaviors include age-appropriate skills that allow people to function in their everyday lives and social interactions. We found that a large amount of the variation in adaptive behavior scores was not explained by cognitive development, autism symptom severity, and behavioral and emotional problems. In addition, there was a wide range of adaptive ability levels in children with autism in our study, including in those with low, average, or high cognitive scores. Our results suggest that adaptive behavior scores could provide useful information about the strengths and support needs of autistic children above and beyond measures of cognitive ability and autism symptom severity. Adaptive behavior scores provide important information on the needs of autistic people.

The Prevalence and Characteristics of Children With Profound Autism, 15 Sites, United States, 2000-2016.

OBJECTIVES: Autism spectrum disorder (autism) is a heterogeneous condition that poses challenges in describing the needs of individuals with autism and making prognoses about future outcomes. We applied a newly proposed definition of profound autism to surveillance data to estimate the percentage of children with autism who have profound autism and describe their sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed population-based surveillance data from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network for 20 135 children aged 8 years with autism during 2000-2016. Children were classified as having profound autism if they were nonverbal, were minimally verbal, or had an intelligence quotient <50. RESULTS: The percentage of 8-year-old children with profound autism among those with autism was 26.7%. Compared with children with non-profound autism, children with profound autism were more likely to be female, from racial and ethnic minority groups, of low socioeconomic status, born preterm or with low birth weight; have self-injurious behaviors; have seizure disorders; and have lower adaptive scores. In 2016, the prevalence of profound autism was 4.6 per 1000 8-year-olds. The prevalence ratio (PR) of profound autism was higher among non-Hispanic Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (PR = 1.55; 95 CI, 1.38-1.73), non-Hispanic Black (PR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.67-1.86), and Hispanic (PR = 1.50; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26) children than among non-Hispanic White children. CONCLUSIONS: As the population of children with autism continues to change, describing and quantifying the population with profound autism is important for planning. Policies and programs could consider the needs of people with profound autism across the life span to ensure their needs are met.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 8 Years - Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2020.

Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2020. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance program that provides estimates of the prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years. In 2020, there were 11 ADDM Network sites across the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). To ascertain ASD among children aged 8 years, ADDM Network staff review and abstract developmental evaluations and records from community medical and educational service providers. A child met the case definition if their record documented 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in an evaluation, 2) a classification of ASD in special education, or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. Results: For 2020, across all 11 ADDM sites, ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years ranged from 23.1 in Maryland to 44.9 in California. The overall ASD prevalence was 27.6 per 1,000 (one in 36) children aged 8 years and was 3.8 times as prevalent among boys as among girls (43.0 versus 11.4). Overall, ASD prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic White children (24.3) and children of two or more races (22.9) than among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black), Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (A/PI) children (29.3, 31.6, and 33.4 respectively). ASD prevalence among non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) children (26.5) was similar to that of other racial and ethnic groups. ASD prevalence was associated with lower household income at three sites, with no association at the other sites.Across sites, the ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years based exclusively on documented ASD diagnostic statements was 20.6 (range = 17.1 in Wisconsin to 35.4 in California). Of the 6,245 children who met the ASD case definition, 74.7% had a documented diagnostic statement of ASD, 65.2% had a documented ASD special education classification, 71.6% had a documented ASD ICD code, and 37.4% had all three types of ASD indicators. The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis was 49 months and ranged from 36 months in California to 59 months in Minnesota.Among the 4,165 (66.7%) children with ASD with information on cognitive ability, 37.9% were classified as having an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability was present among 50.8% of Black, 41.5% of A/PI, 37.8% of two or more races, 34.9% of Hispanic, 34.8% of AI/AN, and 31.8% of White children with ASD. Overall, children with intellectual disability had earlier median ages of ASD diagnosis (43 months) than those without intellectual disability (53 months). Interpretation: For 2020, one in 36 children aged 8 years (approximately 4% of boys and 1% of girls) was estimated to have ASD. These estimates are higher than previous ADDM Network estimates during 2000-2018. For the first time among children aged 8 years, the prevalence of ASD was lower among White children than among other racial and ethnic groups, reversing the direction of racial and ethnic differences in ASD prevalence observed in the past. Black children with ASD were still more likely than White children with ASD to have a co-occurring intellectual disability. Public Health Action: The continued increase among children identified with ASD, particularly among non-White children and girls, highlights the need for enhanced infrastructure to provide equitable diagnostic, treatment, and support services for all children with ASD. Similar to previous reporting periods, findings varied considerably across network sites, indicating the need for additional research to understand the nature of such differences and potentially apply successful identification strategies across states.

Early Identification of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 4 Years - Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2020.

Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2020. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network is an active surveillance program that estimates prevalence and characteristics of ASD and monitors timing of ASD identification among children aged 4 and 8 years. In 2020, a total of 11 sites (located in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin) conducted surveillance of ASD among children aged 4 and 8 years and suspected ASD among children aged 4 years. Surveillance included children who lived in the surveillance area at any time during 2020. Children were classified as having ASD if they ever received 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in an evaluation, 2) a special education classification of autism (eligibility), or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code (revisions 9 or 10). Children aged 4 years were classified as having suspected ASD if they did not meet the case definition for ASD but had a documented qualified professional's statement indicating a suspicion of ASD. This report focuses on children aged 4 years in 2020 compared with children aged 8 years in 2020. Results: For 2020, ASD prevalence among children aged 4 years varied across sites, from 12.7 per 1,000 children in Utah to 46.4 in California. The overall prevalence was 21.5 and was higher among boys than girls at every site. Compared with non-Hispanic White children, ASD prevalence was 1.8 times as high among Hispanic, 1.6 times as high among non-Hispanic Black, 1.4 times as high among Asian or Pacific Islander, and 1.2 times as high among multiracial children. Among the 58.3% of children aged 4 years with ASD and information on intellectual ability, 48.5% had an IQ score of ≤70 on their most recent IQ test or an examiner's statement of intellectual disability. Among children with a documented developmental evaluation, 78.0% were evaluated by age 36 months. Children aged 4 years had a higher cumulative incidence of ASD diagnosis or eligibility by age 48 months compared with children aged 8 years at all sites; risk ratios ranged from 1.3 in New Jersey and Utah to 2.0 in Tennessee. In the 6 months before the March 2020 COVID-19 pandemic declaration by the World Health Organization, there were 1,593 more evaluations and 1.89 more ASD identifications per 1,000 children aged 4 years than children aged 8 years received 4 years earlier. After the COVID-19 pandemic declaration, this pattern reversed: in the 6 months after pandemic onset, there were 217 fewer evaluations and 0.26 fewer identifications per 1,000 children aged 4 years than children aged 8 years received 4 years earlier. Patterns of evaluation and identification varied among sites, but there was not recovery to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels by the end of 2020 at most sites or overall. For 2020, prevalence of suspected ASD ranged from 0.5 (California) to 10.4 (Arkansas) per 1,000 children aged 4 years, with an increase from 2018 at five sites (Arizona, Arkansas, Maryland, New Jersey, and Utah). Demographic and cognitive characteristics of children aged 4 years with suspected ASD were similar to children aged 4 years with ASD. Interpretation: A wide range of prevalence of ASD by age 4 years was observed, suggesting differences in early ASD identification practices among communities. At all sites, cumulative incidence of ASD by age 48 months among children aged 4 years was higher compared with children aged 8 years in 2020, indicating improvements in early identification of ASD. Higher numbers of evaluations and rates of identification were evident among children aged 4 years until the COVID-19 pandemic onset in 2020. Sustained lower levels of ASD evaluations and identification seen at a majority of sites after the pandemic onset could indicate disruptions in typical practices in evaluations and identification for health service providers and schools through the end of 2020. Sites with more recovery could indicate successful strategies to mitigate service interruption, such as pivoting to telehealth approaches for evaluation. Public Health Action: From 2016 through February of 2020, ASD evaluation and identification among the cohort of children aged 4 years was outpacing ASD evaluation and identification 4 years earlier (from 2012 until March 2016) among the cohort of children aged 8 years in 2020 . From 2016 to March 2020, ASD evaluation and identification among the cohort of children aged 4 years was outpacing that among children aged 8 years in 2020 from 2012 until March 2016. The disruptions in evaluation that coincided with the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the increase in prevalence of suspected ASD in 2020 could have led to delays in ASD identification and interventions. Communities could evaluate the impact of these disruptions as children in affected cohorts age and consider strategies to mitigate service disruptions caused by future public health emergencies.

Adolescents With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Diagnostic Patterns, Co-occurring Conditions, and Transition Planning.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to describe child characteristics associated with later autism spectrum disorder (ASD) identification and the health status and educational transition plans of adolescents with ASD. METHODS: Longitudinal population-based surveillance cohort from the Autism Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network during 2002-2018 in five catchment areas in the United States. Participants included 3,148 children born in 2002 whose records were first reviewed for ASD surveillance in 2010. RESULTS: Of the 1,846 children identified in the community as an ASD case, 11.6% were first identified after age 8 years. Children who were more likely to have ASD identified at older ages were Hispanic; were born with low birth weight; were verbal; had high intelligence quotient or adaptive scores; or had certain co-occurring neuropsychological conditions by age 8 years. By age 16 years, neuropsychological conditions were common with more than half of the adolescents with ASD having a diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or anxiety. Intellectual disability (ID) status was unchanged for the majority (>80%) of children from ages 8-16 years. A transition plan was completed for over 94% of adolescents, but disparities were observed in planning by ID status. DISCUSSION: A high percentage of adolescents with ASD have co-occurring neuropsychological conditions, markedly higher than at age 8. While most adolescents had transition planning, this occurred less often for those with ID. Ensuring access to services for all people with ASD during adolescence and transition to adulthood may help to promote overall health and quality of life.

Statewide county-level autism spectrum disorder prevalence estimates-seven U.S. states, 2018.

PURPOSE: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) prevalence information is necessary for identifying community needs such as addressing disparities in identification and services. METHODS: Seven Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network sites participated in a pilot project to link statewide health and education data to generate statewide and county-level prevalence estimates for a broader age range for their states for the first time. RESULTS: Statewide prevalence of ASD for ages 3-21 years in 2018 ranged from 1.5% in Tennessee and Wisconsin to 2.3% in Arizona. The median county-level prevalence of ASD was 1.4% of residents ages 3-21 years. More boys than girls had ASD at all sites, and prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native residents compared to non-Hispanic White residents at most sites. ASD prevalence estimates for children aged 8 years were similar to 2018 ADDM Network estimates that used record review to provide more in-depth information, but showed greater variation for children aged 4 years. CONCLUSIONS: Linkage of statewide data sets provides less detailed but actionable local information when more resource-intensive methods are not possible.

Fertility rates in women with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Wisconsin Medicaid.

BACKGROUND: Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) face stigma and inequity surrounding opportunity and care during pregnancy. Little work has quantified fertility rates among women with IDD which prevents proper allocation of care. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to cross-sectionally describe fertility patterns among women with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in 10-years of Medicaid-linked birth records. STUDY DESIGN: Our sample was Medicaid-enrolled women with live births in Wisconsin from 2007 to 2016. We identified IDD through prepregnancy Medicaid claims. We calculated general fertility-, age-specific-, and the total fertility-rates and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for women with and without IDD and generated estimates by year and IDD-type. RESULTS: General fertility rate in women with IDD was 62.1 births per 1000 women with IDD (95% CI 59.2, 64.9 per 1000 women) and 77.1 per 1000 for women without IDD (95% CI: 76.8, 77.4 per 1000 women). General fertility rate ratio was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.7, 0.9). Total fertility was 1.80 births per woman with IDD and 2.05 births per woman without IDD (rate ratio: 0.89 95% CI: 0.5, 1.5). Peak fertility occurred later for autistic women (30-34 years), compared with women with other IDD (20-24 years). CONCLUSION: In Wisconsin Medicaid, general fertility rate of women with IDD was lower than women without IDD: the difference was attenuated when accounting for differing age distributions. Results highlight the disparities women with IDD face and the importance of allocating pregnancy care within Medicaid.

Global prevalence of autism: A systematic review update.

Prevalence estimates of autism are essential for informing public policy, raising awareness, and developing research priorities. Using a systematic review, we synthesized estimates of the prevalence of autism worldwide. We examined factors accounting for variability in estimates and critically reviewed evidence relevant for hypotheses about biological or social determinants (viz., biological sex, sociodemographic status, ethnicity/race, and nativity) potentially modifying prevalence estimates of autism. We performed the search in November 2021 within Medline for studies estimating autism prevalence, published since our last systematic review in 2012. Data were extracted by two independent researchers. Since 2012, 99 estimates from 71 studies were published indicating a global autism prevalence that ranges within and across regions, with a median prevalence of 100/10,000 (range: 1.09/10,000 to 436.0/10,000). The median male-to-female ratio was 4.2. The median percentage of autism cases with co-occurring intellectual disability was 33.0%. Estimates varied, likely reflecting complex and dynamic interactions between patterns of community awareness, service capacity, help seeking, and sociodemographic factors. A limitation of this review is that synthesizing methodological features precludes a quality appraisal of studies. Our findings reveal an increase in measured autism prevalence globally, reflecting the combined effects of multiple factors including the increase in community awareness and public health response globally, progress in case identification and definition, and an increase in community capacity. Hypotheses linking factors that increase the likelihood of developing autism with variations in prevalence will require research with large, representative samples and comparable autism diagnostic criteria and case-finding methods in diverse world regions over time. LAY SUMMARY: We reviewed studies of the prevalence of autism worldwide, considering the impact of geographic, ethnic, and socioeconomic factors on prevalence estimates. Approximately 1/100 children are diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder around the world. Prevalence estimates increased over time and varied greatly within and across sociodemographic groups. These findings reflect changes in the definition of autism and differences in the methodology and contexts of prevalence studies.

Early Identification of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 4 Years - Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2018.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PERIOD COVERED: 2018. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network is an active surveillance program that estimates ASD prevalence and monitors timing of ASD identification among children aged 4 and 8 years. This report focuses on children aged 4 years in 2018, who were born in 2014 and had a parent or guardian who lived in the surveillance area in one of 11 sites (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin) at any time during 2018. Children were classified as having ASD if they ever received 1) an ASD diagnostic statement (diagnosis) in an evaluation, 2) a special education classification of ASD (eligibility), or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. Suspected ASD also was tracked among children aged 4 years. Children who did not meet the case definition for ASD were classified as having suspected ASD if their records contained a qualified professional's statement indicating a suspicion of ASD. RESULTS: For 2018, the overall ASD prevalence was 17.0 per 1,000 (one in 59) children aged 4 years. Prevalence varied from 9.1 per 1,000 in Utah to 41.6 per 1,000 in California. At every site, prevalence was higher among boys than girls, with an overall male-to-female prevalence ratio of 3.4. Prevalence of ASD among children aged 4 years was lower among non-Hispanic White (White) children (12.9 per 1,000) than among non-Hispanic Black (Black) children (16.6 per 1,000), Hispanic children (21.1 per 1,000), and Asian/Pacific Islander (A/PI) children (22.7 per 1,000). Among children aged 4 years with ASD and information on intellectual ability, 52% met the surveillance case definition of co-occurring intellectual disability (intelligence quotient ≤70 or an examiner's statement of intellectual disability documented in an evaluation). Of children aged 4 years with ASD, 72% had a first evaluation at age ≤36 months. Stratified by census-tract-level median household income (MHI) tertile, a lower percentage of children with ASD and intellectual disability was evaluated by age 36 months in the low MHI tertile (72%) than in the high MHI tertile (84%). Cumulative incidence of ASD diagnosis or eligibility received by age 48 months was 1.5 times as high among children aged 4 years (13.6 per 1,000 children born in 2014) as among those aged 8 years (8.9 per 1,000 children born in 2010). Across MHI tertiles, higher cumulative incidence of ASD diagnosis or eligibility received by age 48 months was associated with lower MHI. Suspected ASD prevalence was 2.6 per 1,000 children aged 4 years, meaning for every six children with ASD, one child had suspected ASD. The combined prevalence of ASD and suspected ASD (19.7 per 1,000 children aged 4 years) was lower than ASD prevalence among children aged 8 years (23.0 per 1,000 children aged 8 years). INTERPRETATION: Groups with historically lower prevalence of ASD (non-White and lower MHI) had higher prevalence and cumulative incidence of ASD among children aged 4 years in 2018, suggesting progress in identification among these groups. However, a lower percentage of children with ASD and intellectual disability in the low MHI tertile were evaluated by age 36 months than in the high MHI group, indicating disparity in timely evaluation. Children aged 4 years had a higher cumulative incidence of diagnosis or eligibility by age 48 months compared with children aged 8 years, indicating improvement in early identification of ASD. The overall prevalence for children aged 4 years was less than children aged 8 years, even when prevalence of children suspected of having ASD by age 4 years is included. This finding suggests that many children identified after age 4 years do not have suspected ASD documented by age 48 months. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: Children born in 2014 were more likely to be identified with ASD by age 48 months than children born in 2010, indicating increased early identification. However, ASD identification among children aged 4 years varied by site, suggesting opportunities to examine developmental screening and diagnostic practices that promote earlier identification. Children aged 4 years also were more likely to have co-occurring intellectual disability than children aged 8 years, suggesting that improvement in the early identification and evaluation of developmental concerns outside of cognitive impairments is still needed. Improving early identification of ASD could lead to earlier receipt of evidence-based interventions and potentially improve developmental outcomes.

Prevalence and Characteristics of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 8 Years - Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2018.

PROBLEM/CONDITION: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PERIOD COVERED: 2018. DESCRIPTION OF SYSTEM: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network conducts active surveillance of ASD. This report focuses on the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 8 years in 2018 whose parents or guardians lived in 11 ADDM Network sites in the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). To ascertain ASD among children aged 8 years, ADDM Network staff review and abstract developmental evaluations and records from community medical and educational service providers. In 2018, children met the case definition if their records documented 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in an evaluation (diagnosis), 2) a special education classification of ASD (eligibility), or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. RESULTS: For 2018, across all 11 ADDM sites, ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years ranged from 16.5 in Missouri to 38.9 in California. The overall ASD prevalence was 23.0 per 1,000 (one in 44) children aged 8 years, and ASD was 4.2 times as prevalent among boys as among girls. Overall ASD prevalence was similar across racial and ethnic groups, except American Indian/Alaska Native children had higher ASD prevalence than non-Hispanic White (White) children (29.0 versus 21.2 per 1,000 children aged 8 years). At multiple sites, Hispanic children had lower ASD prevalence than White children (Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, and Utah), and non-Hispanic Black (Black) children (Georgia and Minnesota). The associations between ASD prevalence and neighborhood-level median household income varied by site. Among the 5,058 children who met the ASD case definition, 75.8% had a diagnostic statement of ASD in an evaluation, 18.8% had an ASD special education classification or eligibility and no ASD diagnostic statement, and 5.4% had an ASD ICD code only. ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years that was based exclusively on documented ASD diagnostic statements was 17.4 overall (range: 11.2 in Maryland to 29.9 in California). The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis ranged from 36 months in California to 63 months in Minnesota. Among the 3,007 children with ASD and data on cognitive ability, 35.2% were classified as having an intelligence quotient (IQ) score ≤70. The percentages of children with ASD with IQ scores ≤70 were 49.8%, 33.1%, and 29.7% among Black, Hispanic, and White children, respectively. Overall, children with ASD and IQ scores ≤70 had earlier median ages of ASD diagnosis than children with ASD and IQ scores >70 (44 versus 53 months). INTERPRETATION: In 2018, one in 44 children aged 8 years was estimated to have ASD, and prevalence and median age of identification varied widely across sites. Whereas overall ASD prevalence was similar by race and ethnicity, at certain sites Hispanic children were less likely to be identified as having ASD than White or Black children. The higher proportion of Black children compared with White and Hispanic children classified as having intellectual disability was consistent with previous findings. PUBLIC HEALTH ACTION: The variability in ASD prevalence and community ASD identification practices among children with different racial, ethnic, and geographical characteristics highlights the importance of research into the causes of that variability and strategies to provide equitable access to developmental evaluations and services. These findings also underscore the need for enhanced infrastructure for diagnostic, treatment, and support services to meet the needs of all children.

Correction: Furnier et al. Translating Molecular Technologies into Routine Newborn Screening Practice. Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2020, 6, 80.

In the original article [...].

A preliminary epidemiologic study of social (pragmatic) communication disorder in the context of developmental language disorder.

BACKGROUND: There is extremely limited population-based research on social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SCD). Population-based samples have the potential to better characterize the SCD phenotype by mitigating confounds and biases that are typical of convenience and clinical samples. AIMS: The aims of this preliminary epidemiologic study were to advance our understanding of the SCD phenotype relative to developmental language disorder (DLD), obtain an estimate of prevalence, identify risk factors and lay the groundwork for future population level research of SCD. METHODS & PROCEDURES: We analysed existing data from the EpiSLI Database to examine social communication skills in 393 8th grade (13-14 years) children with and without a history of DLD. The primary measure used to evaluate SCD was the Children's Communication Checklist (CCC-2). Two case definitions of SCD reflecting DSM-5 criteria were examined. Both definitions involved significant pragmatic impairment, employing a commonly adopted clinical cut-point of 1.5 SD. In one case, pragmatic deficits could occur along with structural language deficits and, in the other case (established using principal component analysis), pragmatic and social skills were disproportionately lower than structural language abilities. OUTCOMES & RESULTS: When using the first case definition, SCD was much more common in children with a history of DLD than without DLD and history of language disorder at kindergarten was a significant risk factor for SCD in adolescence. However, it is important to note that SCD could be found in children with no prior deficits in other aspects of language. When the second definition was employed, SCD was equally distributed across children with and without a history of DLD. Male sex was a significant risk factor using this case definition of SCD. The estimated prevalence of SCD ranged from 7% (SE = 1.5%) to 11% (SE = 1.7%), acknowledging that prevalence depends on the cut-point selected to determine communication disorder. CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS: These findings contribute to our understanding of the association between SCD and DLD by recognizing varying profiles of pragmatic and social communication difficulties, which in turn may help refine our diagnostic categories. Preliminary prevalence estimates of SCD can serve as an initial guidepost for identification and planning for intervention services for this condition. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on this subject There is considerable debate about the diagnostic category of SCD and its relation to other neurodevelopmental disorders. What this study adds to existing knowledge Using data from a US-based epidemiologic sample of DLD, this study offers new information about the association between SCD and DLD, provides preliminary estimates of SCD prevalence, and identifies risk factors for SCD. Clinical implications of this study Improved understanding of possible profiles of pragmatic and social communication deficits will help to clarify diagnostic categories and preliminary prevalence estimates may assist with ensuring availability of adequate intervention services.

Birth outcomes affecting infants of mothers with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

BACKGROUND: Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) face increased risk of adverse maternal pregnancy outcomes, yet less is known about infant outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To examine birth outcomes of infants born to mothers with IDD and assess associations with demographics and IDD-type. METHODS: We used data from the Big Data for Little Kids project, which links Wisconsin birth records to Medicaid claims for live births covered by Medicaid from 2007 to 2016. We identified IDD using maternal prepregnancy Medicaid claims and ran Poisson regression (with a log link function) with robust variance clustered by mother to compare prevalence of outcomes between singleton births with and without mothers with IDD. We adjusted the associations for demographic factors and estimated prevalence ratios (PR) as the effect measure. We assessed outcomes by IDD-type (intellectual disability, genetic conditions, cerebral palsy, and autism spectrum disorder) to explore differences by categories of IDD. RESULTS: Of 267,395 infants, 1696 (0.6%) had mothers with IDD. A greater percentage of infants with mothers with IDD were born preterm (12.8% vs 7.8%; PR 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42, 1.89), small for gestational age (8.5% vs 5.4%; PR 1.42, 95% CI 1.25, 1.61), and died within 12 months of birth (3.2% vs 0.7%; PR 4.93, 95% CI 3.73, 6.43) compared to infants of mothers without IDD. Prevalence ratios were robust to adjustment for demographics factors. Estimates did not meaningfully differ when comparing different IDD-types. CONCLUSIONS: A greater porportion of infants born to mothers with IDD who were covered by Medicaid had poor outcomes compared to other infants. Prevalence of poor infant outcomes was greater for mothers with IDD even after accounting for demographic differences. It is imperative to understand why infants of mothers with IDD are at greater risk so interventions and management can be developed.