Background
Early intervention in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) improves outcomes, but treatment access depends on early identification. Despite reliability of most autism diagnoses by age 24 months, the majority of children with autism do not receive comprehensive evaluations until after age 36 months. Although many possible reasons exist for delayed evaluations, the referral decision process itself is not clearly defined nor understood. In particular, little is known about how perceptions of early childhood symptoms of ASD interact with decision criteria to ultimately refer a child for comprehensive diagnostic assessment.

Method
To better understand pre-referral perceptions and decision factors involved, we provided multiple video clips from early comprehensive autism evaluations as prompts, then asked early childhood clinicians and educators (n = 346) to make decisions about autism referral, then to identify factors considered when making decisions.

Results
Decision factors cited most often were play, social interactions/engagement, and verbal behaviors, but none were cited by a clear majority. Some important early signs were infrequently mentioned: absence of joint attention, social reciprocity and gestures. Accuracy of referral decisions was similar across disciplines, indicating a broad range of professionals capable of identifying early signs of autism.

Conclusions
Autism training across early childhood professional disciplines should emphasize importance of early signs involving significant absences of behaviors, such as low joint attention, gestures, and social reciprocity in addition to odd social, verbal, and play behaviors. Such targeted training may encourage earlier referrals when autism is suspected in young children.

Functional neuroimaging research in autism spectrum disorder has reported patterns of decreased long-range, within-network, and interhemispheric connectivity. Research has also reported increased corticostriatal connectivity and between-network connectivity for default and attentional networks. Past studies have excluded individuals with autism and low verbal and cognitive performance (LVCP), so connectivity in individuals more significantly affected with autism has not yet been studied. This represents a critical gap in our understanding of brain function across the autism spectrum.

Core deficits in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) center around social communication and behavior. For individuals with ASD, these deficits complicate the task of learning how to cope with and manage complex social emotional issues. Although individuals with ASD may receive sufficient academic and basic behavioral support in school settings, supports for dealing with complex social emotional issues are more difficult to access, even though these issues significantly impact student learning. When addressing these challenging social- and emotional-based issues, school and professional personnel need more specific instructional skill sets and resources to effectively and compassionately support students with ASD. In this article, we address three challenging areas of social emotional development that are commonly experienced by individuals with ASD: anxiety, social isolation, and grief. We briefly explore the existing research on these three topics, identify evidence-based practices and learning strategies to support social emotional learning in individuals with ASD, and include descriptive lists of practical resources that address anxiety, social isolation, and grief.

BACKGROUND: Pediatricians, neurologists, and geneticists are important sources for autism surveillance, screening, and referrals, but practical time constraints limit the clinical utility of behavioral observations. We analyzed behaviors under favorable conditions (ie, video of autism evaluations reviewed by experts) to determine what is optimally observable within 10-minute samples, asked for referral impressions, and compared these to formal screening and developmental testing results.

METHODS: Participants (n = 42, aged 15 to 33 months) were typically developing controls and children who screened positive during universal autism screening within a large community pediatric practice. Diagnostic evaluations were performed after screening to determine group status (autism, language delay, or typical). Licensed psychologists with toddler and autism expertise, unaware of diagnostic status, analyzed two 10-minute video samples of participants’ autism evaluations, measuring 5 behaviors: Responding, Initiating, Vocalizing, Play, and Response to Name. Raters were asked for autism referral impressions based solely on individual 10-minute observations.

RESULTS: Children who had autism showed more typical behavior (89% of the time) than atypical behavior (11%) overall. Expert raters missed 39% of cases in the autism group as needing autism referrals based on brief but highly focused observations. Significant differences in cognitive and adaptive development existed among groups, with receptive language skills differentiating the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS: Brief clinical observations may not provide enough information about atypical behaviors to reliably detect autism risk. High prevalence of typical behaviors in brief samples may distort clinical impressions of atypical behaviors. Formal screening tools and general developmental testing provide critical data for accurate referrals.

This interactive, online resource provides a pathway for clinicians seeking information on how to prepare for medical visits with patients who have autism spectrum disorders using a three-tiered system of preparation and responses.

The purpose of this case report is to describe the conceptualization and treatment of comorbid anxiety diagnoses, selective mutism, and procedural anxiety in a young female presenting to a pediatric family therapy clinic with common variable immunodeficiency disease (CVID) and behavioral concerns. Treatment included a comprehensive interview assessing domains of functioning. Treatment plans for both selective mutism and procedural anxiety were informed by behavior learning theories. In collaboration with parents and teachers, evidence-based interventions were implemented concurrently across the clinic, home, and school settings to facilitate generalization. Over the course of 8 sessions, coping skills were successfully employed in the home setting to decrease procedural anxiety. Behavioral techniques implemented by clinician, parents, and the patient’s teacher to reinforce functional communication resulted in the reestablishment of speech in the school setting. Comorbid treatment of anxiety disorders proved successful and was effectively applied within an academic medical setting in a child with CVID. Application of evidence-based interventions informed by behavioral learning theories brought about improvements in both functional communication and procedural anxiety. Close collaboration among pediatric psychologists, school personnel, and parents was critical to achieving positive treatment outcomes across multiple settings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved)

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate the feasibility and outcome of a systematic autism screening process for all toddlers (aged 14–30 months) in a large, community-based pediatric practice.

METHODS: All toddlers who presented to the clinic during the 6-month screening period were eligible. We used 2 screening questionnaires and allowed physicians to refer directly to capture as many children as possible. Receptionists and medical assistants distributed and collected screening questionnaires; research staff did all scoring and follow-up, either by telephone or in person when indicated.

RESULTS: We obtained a high rate of screening (80% of eligible children). Of the 796 children screened, 3 had already been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD); an additional 10 children who showed signs of early ASD that warranted further evaluation or intervention were identified. Formal screening measures identified more children with ASD than did clinical judgment or caregiver concerns; however, no single method (ie, questionnaire, caregiver concerns, provider concerns) identified all children with signs of early ASD. We had excellent participation from racially and ethnically diverse families, including Spanish-speaking families. Thirty-two percent of the children who were screened did not present for a well-child visit during the study period and were screened at a sick visit, follow-up visit, or injection appointment.

CONCLUSIONS: A partnership between pediatricians and autism specialists resulted in effective, systematic autism screening. Future studies should examine how to create effective systems of care.