This study describes children’s “sensory experiences”, generates parents’ perceptions and explanations of these experiences, and compares these experiences across children with and without autism. Parents of 66 preschoolers (29 typically-developing; 37 with autism) were interviewed using a Critical Incident Technique. Parents described a situation where their child had a “good” sensory experience, a situation where their child had a “bad” sensory experience, and their own perception of how these situations felt to the child. The most common unpleasant experiences for both groups related to sound; the most common pleasant experiences involved touch and movement. Children with autism were reported to have more extreme and/or unusual experiences, and negative food-related experiences than typically-developing peers. Parental explanations for children’s responses focused on qualities of the child, stimulus, and/or context. Many parents had difficulty understanding the concept of sensory experiences. Parents of children with autism were more likely to recognize elements in their children’s experiences as being sensory, and likely to attribute these responses to aspects of autism. Parents’ positive response to the interview itself was an unexpected result with clinical relevance.
This study analyzes the emergent use of gestures used among 9-12-month-old infants with autism and typical development using retrospective video analysis. The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the frequency, initiation, prompting, and diversity of types of gestures used for social interaction purposes. It was hypothesized that a restricted variety in type(s) of gestures as well as fewer child-initiated gestures and more prompted gestures would be associated with later diagnosis of autism. Logistic regression analysis found that decreased variety in type of gestures used was significantly associated with autism status. Neither number of total gestures nor initiation of gestures (child-initiated vs. prompted) was significantly associated with autism status.
An infant’s vocal capacity develops significantly during the first year of life. Research suggests early measures of pre-speech development, such as canonical babbling and volubility, can differentiate typical versus disordered development. This study offers a new contribution by comparing early vocal development in 10 infants with Fragile X syndrome and 14 with typical development. Results suggest infants with Fragile X syndrome produce fewer syllables and have significantly lower canonical babbling ratios (i.e., canonical syllables/total syllables) compared to infants who are typically developing. Furthermore, the particular measures of babbling were strong predictors of group membership, adding evidence regarding the possible utility of these markers in early identification.
This study explored North Carolina pediatric healthcare professional's (PHP) perceptions of screening 12-18 month old infants for Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Eight focus groups (66 PHPs) were conducted across practice settings. The purpose was to explore PHP's perspectives to: inform development of ASD screening tools and ultimately impact their use in PHP settings. PHPs reported concerns, barriers, and the need for research to support early ASD screening. Additionally, they expressed the need for: (a) clear "red flags" of ASD for 12-18 month olds; (b) socioculturally sensitive and effective screening tools; (c) effective early interventions; (d) systems to handle potential increases in referrals; and (e) continuing education. PHPs also demonstrated preferences about screening tool characteristics and processes for enhancing screening efforts.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.