A possible role of the Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile in screening for autism: a proof-of-concept study in the specific sample of prematurely born children with birth weights <1,500 g

Abstract

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to explore the potential of the Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile (ITSP) as a screening tool for autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in prematurely born children.MethodsParents of 157 children with birth weights <1,500 g (aged 2 years, corrected for prematurity; 88 boys, 69 girls) completed a screening battery that included the ITSP, Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT), and the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile Infant-Toddler Checklist (CSBS-DP-ITC). Children with known disabilities were excluded. All the children who were screened positive on any of the screening tools subsequently underwent clinical examination including the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule.ResultsWe used classification trees to answer the question whether ITSP (or some of its subscales) could be combined with the M-CHAT and/or the CSBS-DP-ITC or its subscales into an effective ASD screening tool. Using the CSBS-DP-ITC, overall score, and the Sensation Seeking subscale of the ITSP, we obtained a screening tool that was able to identify all of the ASD children in our sample (confirmed by cross-validation). The proposed screening tool is scored as follows: 1) if the overall CSBS-DP-ITC value is <45.5, then the screening is positive; 2) if the overall CSBS-DP-ITC value is ≥45.5 and the z-score of the Sensation Seeking subscale of ITSP is ≥1.54, then the screening is positive; 3) otherwise, the screening is negative.ConclusionThe use of CSBS-DP-ITC in combination with the Sensation Seeking subscale of the ITSP improved the accuracy of autism screening in preterm children.

Effectiveness of Early Physiotherapy in an Infant With a High Risk of Developmental Delay

“…Sensory profile [15] In quadrants, seeking was 35 (seeker), avoiding was 43 (defensive), sensitivity was 38 (detects sensory input at a high intensity), and registration was 21 (misses out sensory input at a high intensity). The sensory and behavioral section included a general score of 23, an auditory score of 20, a visual score of 24, a touching score of 31, a movement score of 20, an oral score of 21, and a behavioral score of 22.…”

Detection of Early Warning Signs in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Systematic Review

“…Although screening for ASD is recommended at 18 months using M-CHAT, according to studies that have been conducted with high-risk siblings, sufficient evidence has been found to affirm that there are differential behavioral markers of ASD between 12 and 18 months of age [ 6 ]. Additionally, the M-CHAT instrument performs with a low-to-moderate accuracy in children with developmental concerns [ 7 ].…”

“…The best tools are those with higher values for sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPV). Sensitivity refers to the proportion of children correctly identified as “high-risk”, and PPV is defined as the proportion of children with positive screening who finally receive a diagnosis [ 7 ].…”

Explaining individual differences in infant visual sensory seeking

“…This proposal draws heavily on studies of sensory processing in atypical populations. Sensory atypicalities, manifested as increased or decreased sensitivity or as atypical seeking of sensory stimulation, are reported in Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) (Ben-Sasson et al, 2009;Damiano-Goodwin et al, 2018;Mulligan & White, 2012), Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Bijlenga, Tjon-Ka-Jie, Schuijers, & Kooij, 2017;Dunn & Bennett, 2002;Ghanizadeh, 2011;Yochman, Parush, & Ornoy, 2004), preterm birth (Beranova et al, 2017;Bröring et al, 2018), and Fragile X syndrome (Baranek et al, 2002;Rogers, Hepburn, & Wehner, 2003). For example, during early childhood, ASD has often been associated with increased behavioral (Baranek, Boyd, Poe, David, & Watson, 2007;Baranek, Foster, & Berkson, 1997) and neural response to sensory input (Kolesnik et al, 2019;Miyazaki et al, 2007), and decreased seeking of sensory stimulation (Beranova et al, 2017;Mulligan & White, 2012;Ben-Sasson et al, 2009;Tomchek & Dunn, 2007; but see Damiano-Goodwin et al, 2018).…”

“…Sensory atypicalities, manifested as increased or decreased sensitivity or as atypical seeking of sensory stimulation, are reported in Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) (Ben-Sasson et al, 2009;Damiano-Goodwin et al, 2018;Mulligan & White, 2012), Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Bijlenga, Tjon-Ka-Jie, Schuijers, & Kooij, 2017;Dunn & Bennett, 2002;Ghanizadeh, 2011;Yochman, Parush, & Ornoy, 2004), preterm birth (Beranova et al, 2017;Bröring et al, 2018), and Fragile X syndrome (Baranek et al, 2002;Rogers, Hepburn, & Wehner, 2003). For example, during early childhood, ASD has often been associated with increased behavioral (Baranek, Boyd, Poe, David, & Watson, 2007;Baranek, Foster, & Berkson, 1997) and neural response to sensory input (Kolesnik et al, 2019;Miyazaki et al, 2007), and decreased seeking of sensory stimulation (Beranova et al, 2017;Mulligan & White, 2012;Ben-Sasson et al, 2009;Tomchek & Dunn, 2007; but see Damiano-Goodwin et al, 2018). Conversely, during late childhood and adulthood, ASD has been linked to both increased and decreased behavioral (Ausderau et al, 2014;Rogers & Ozonoff, 2005) and neural response to sensory input (Cascio, Gu, Schauder, Key, & Yoder, 2015;Marco, Hinkley, Hill, & Nagarajan, 2011), and elevated seeking of restricted, repetitive, and often self-produced sensory stimulation (Ben-Sasson et al, 2009;Lane, Young, Baker, & Angley, 2010;Liss, Saulnier, Fein, & Kinsbourne, 2006;Simpson, Adams, Alston-Knox, Heussler, & Keen, 2019;Tomchek, Little, Myers, & Dunn, 2018).…”