Search

An infant or toddler can begin the process of receiving Part C early intervention services by having a diagnosed condition with a high probability of developmental delay (Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004). How states define those diagnosed conditions that begin the initiation process varies widely. Lists of diagnosed conditions were collected from state Part C websites and Part C coordinators for a descriptive analysis. Across 49 states, the District of Columbia, and 4 territories, a final list of 620 unique conditions was compiled. No single condition was listed by all jurisdictions. Hearing impairment was the condition listed by the most states (n = 38), followed by fetal alcohol syndrome (n = 34). Of the 620 conditions, 168 (27%) were listed by only 1 state, 554 (89%) were listed by fewer than 10 states, and 66 (11%) were listed by 10 or more states. Of these 66 conditions, 47 (71%) were listed by fewer than 20 states. Most of these 66 conditions (n = 48; 72.7%) had a prevalence of "very rare or rare," 8 (12%) were "common," 6 (9%) were "very common," and 4 (6.1%) were "unknown." The wide heterogeneity in the number and type of diagnostic conditions listed across states should be further investigated as it may represent imbalances in children with diagnosed conditions gaining access to Part C evaluations and individualized family service plans and potentially the services themselves across states. In addition, providing ready access to lists of diagnosed conditions is a simple step that could help states and Part C programs facilitate access to services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined the ways in which young children with autism and typical children focus their engagement with objects and people (peers and adults) in an inclusive preschool setting. A cross-sectional analysis was conducted of 30 typical children and 30 children with autism, with 10 different children from each group at 3 different ages (2, 3, and 4 years), interacting with both adults and peers available as partners. By the age of 3 years, typically developing children engaged in coordinated joint attention (CJA) with others at a stable rate. At 4 years, children with autism exhibited more sharing attention to objects and events with others compared with groups with autism at 2 and 3 years. However, episodes of shared engagement remained low, and joint engagement involved more episodes of supported joint engagement compared to typical peers, with an adult as their primary partner. Typical children at 4 years of age showed a trend toward increasing their shared attention with peers. Individual children in both groups had a great deal of variability in their joint engagement with others. Children with autism were much less likely to initiate joint episodes and were much more likely to engage in a joint state for instrumental purposes than were their typical peers. These patterns of engagement are likely to have significant impact on the learning opportunities available to these groups of children. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) often co-occur with other developmental, psychiatric, neurologic, or medical diagnoses., Objective: This study examined co-occurring non-ASD diagnoses and symptoms in a population-based cohort of 8 year olds identified with ASD., Method: Data on 2,568 children meeting surveillance case definition for ASD were collected by a multi-site surveillance program. Information was systematically abstracted and reviewed from existing health and education source records and systematically entered into a summary record in a secure database., Results: Eighty-one percent of study children were male; 63% white, 23% black, 14% Hispanic, Asian, or not stated. When age of ASD classification was available, 20% were classified before age 3 years, 36% between ages 3 and 5 years, and 44% after age 5 years. The co-occurrence of > or = 1 non-ASD developmental diagnoses was 83%, > or = 1 psychiatric diagnoses was 10%, > or = 1 neurologic diagnoses was 16%, and at least one possibly causative genetic or neurologic diagnosis was 4%. Children with a previous ASD classification and co-occurring psychiatric or neurologic conditions were more likely to be diagnosed or classified at a later age. Each category of co-occurring non-ASD diagnosis was significantly increased in children whose records did not include an ASD diagnosis or educational classification but who met surveillance criteria for ASD., Conclusions: These data highlight the need for clinicians to keep in mind the high prevalence of associated diagnoses with an ASD diagnosis, and the possibility that in younger children other symptoms or disorders may be masking or obscuring core symptoms of ASD, which would lead to a diagnosis.

Early identification of young children with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) can lead to earlier entry into intervention programs that support improved developmental outcomes. The purpose of the present study was to examine identification and diagnostic patterns of children with ASD who live in a large metropolitan area. One hundred fifteen 8-year-old children diagnosed with ASD were identified from a population-based surveillance system at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Primary variables of interest included earliest age of evaluation and earliest age of diagnosis identified from surveillance records, type of initial ASD diagnosis, evaluation sources that documented first ASD diagnosis, characteristics of professionals assigning first ASD diagnosis, and diagnostic tools used to aid the diagnostic process. We found that children with ASD identified by the surveillance system were initially evaluated at a mean of 48 months but were not diagnosed with ASD until a mean age of 61 months. There were no differences in timing of diagnosis based on sex or racial/ethnic classification, although degree of impairment associated with ASD predicted mean age at first evaluation and mean age at first ASD diagnosis. Most children were identified at non-school sources, such as hospitals and clinics; 24% of the sample did not receive a documented ASD diagnosis until entering school. Most practitioners (70%) did not use a diagnostic instrument when assigning the first ASD diagnosis. Implications for early identification of ASD are discussed.