Children with ASD and Communication Regression: Examining Pre-Loss Skills and Later Language Outcomes Through the Preschool Years

Prescott, Kathryn E; Weismer, Susan Ellis

doi:10.1007/s10803-021-05098-2

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The one qualifying DSM-III-R study assessed multiple domains of language and used these assessments to group participants by language profiles; however, the study did not operationally define each of the language profiles: mixed receptive-expressive language disorders, higher-order language processing disorders, and expressive phonology with or without grammar disorders (Rapin et al, 2009). Two DSM-IV studies grouped participants on the basis of early language and communicative regression (Gagnon et al, 2021; Prescott & Ellis Weismer, 2022), and an additional two grouped participants by language level: (a) low language, or being administered ADOS Module 1 (Lord et al, 1999), and an overall receptive–expressive language standard score of ⩽50 (Ellis Weismer & Kover, 2015); and (b) spoken language benchmarks in children using age-equivalent scores on an overall receptive–expressive language assessment of <15 months for prelinguistic, 15–23 months for first words, 24–35 months for word combinations, and >35 months for sentences (Ellawadi & Ellis Weismer, 2015). The one DSM-5 study that grouped participants defined “high verbal” as within −1 SD or higher and “mid-verbal” as −1 SD or lower on an expressive language measure (Jyotishi et al, 2017).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Girolamo,

Shen,

Monroe Gulick

et al. 2023

Autism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language in autism is heterogeneous, with a significant proportion of individuals having structural language difficulties and inclusion of language impairment as a specifier under Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) criteria for autism. This systematic review asked: What are the reporting patterns of variables pertaining to structural language in autism prior to and after publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.)? What norm-referenced assessments does research use to characterize the language abilities of autistic individuals with respect to language impairment? This preregistered review (PROSPERO: CRD42021260394) followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Searches took place in September 2022 and included Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, PsycINFO, PubMed, and the Directory of Open Access Journals. Search terms included three essential concepts: autism, language, and age. Two coders independently screened and evaluated articles. Searches yielded 57 qualifying studies, with mostly consistent reporting practices prior to and after the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Studies varied in how they defined language groups and in what norm-referenced measures they used. Interpreting research on structural language in autism requires attention to diagnostic and grouping criteria. Although inconsistency in reporting in original studies limited this review, better understanding the available information on structural language in autistic individuals aged 3–21 years may support identification of language needs. Lay abstract Under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.), language impairment can co-occur with autism. It is not yet clear how research defines, reports, and characterizes structural language abilities of autistic individuals eligible for school-based special education services (aged 3–21 years) in the United States. In the United States, students typically must be formally diagnosed to be eligible for services and supports. However, the quality of diagnosis is only as good as the research evidence on which diagnosis depends. To evaluate evidence quality, we examined how studies of school-aged autistic individuals report assessments of language ability. This systematic review included 57 studies using English language age-referenced assessments used to measure structural language. Findings showed many differences across studies in how language abilities were measured and reported. Also, none of the studies fully reported the variables relevant to characterizing language impairment. Outcomes were similar across versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Findings indicate that researchers and clinicians should pay attention to reporting diagnostic and grouping criteria. Carefully interpreting research evidence is critical for ensuring that diagnostic criteria and supports are representative of and accessible to autistic individuals and relevant parties.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Girolamo,

Shen,

Monroe Gulick

et al. 2023

Autism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Eigsti et al (2007) reported ethnicity as white, African American, and Hispanic. Some studies reported race and ethnicity as mutually exclusive: Prescott and Ellis Weismer (2022), Hart and Curtin (2021), Ellawadi & Ellis Weismer (2015), Nevill et al (2019), and Thurm et al (2007). In Girolamo & Rice (2022), two participants felt that US Census categories did not align to their identities and reported “unknown.”…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Studies pertaining to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals underreport participant socio-demographics: A systematic review

Girolamo

Shen

Monroe‐Gulick

et al. 2023

Autism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Autism research tends to exclude racially and ethnically minoritized autistic individuals, limiting the quality of the evidence base for characterizing and diagnosing language impairment in racially and ethnically minoritized autistic individuals. This systematic review examines reporting practices for participant socio-demographics in studies pertaining to language impairment in autistic school-age individuals using age-referenced assessments. This review was preregistered (PROSPERO: CRD42021260394) and followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses protocol. Database searches took place in August of 2021 in Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts, PsycINFO, PubMed, and the Directory of Open Access Journals, for publications during 1980–2021. Search terms included three essential concepts: autism, language, and age. Two coders independently screened and evaluated articles. Of qualifying studies ( n = 59), 17 (29%) reported any information on participant race and ethnicity; in these studies, participants were at least 77% white. Thirty-two studies (54%) reported gender or sex; just 10 studies (17%) reported socio-economic status using multiple indicators. These findings indicate insufficient adherence to reporting guidelines and systematic exclusion of racially and ethnically minoritized. Future work must address replicable reporting and inclusion in autism research. Lay abstract Although exclusion of racially and ethnically minoritized autistic individuals from research is a long-standing issue, we have yet to determine how exclusion impacts areas of autism research important for identifying language impairment. Diagnosis depends on the quality of the evidence (i.e. research) and is often the pathway to gaining access to services. As a first step, we examined how research studies related to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals report participant socio-demographics. We analyzed reports using age-referenced assessments in English ( n = 60), which are commonly used by both practitioners and researchers to diagnose or identify language impairment. Findings showed only 28% of studies reported any information on race and ethnicity; in these studies, most (at least 77%) of the participants were white. In addition, only 56% of studies reported gender or sex and specified what they were reporting (gender, sex, or gender identity). Just 17% reported socio-economic status using multiple indicators. Altogether, findings indicate broad issues with underreporting and exclusion of racially and ethnically minoritized individuals, which might overlay with other aspects of identity including socio-economic status. It is impossible to determine the extent and precise nature of exclusion without intersectional reporting. To ensure that language in autism research is representative of the autistic population, future research must implement reporting guidelines and broaden inclusion of who participates in research studies.

show abstract

“…It has been suggested that global trends on skill recovery in children with regressive autism are likely to be partially confounded by methodological considerations, such as the definitions used to classify regression and the particular methods for measuring persistent delays in communication/ social skill development. For instance, in a longitudinal study of 129 autistic preschool children, Prescott and Ellis Weismer (2022) measured receptive and expressive language outcomes in regressive and non-regressive children at four time points (average age at first measure = 44 months; average age at last measure = 66 months). Using this process, those researchers reported that the expressive-receptive language discrepancies and lower receptive language capabilities found at 44 months were not evident at 66 months, thus challenging data from cross-sectional studies focused on measuring child functioning only at one point in time.…”

Section: Head Size and Brain Volumementioning

confidence: 99%

Neurobiological Concomitants of Autism as Informers of Clinical Practice: a Status Review

Bitsika

Sharpley

2023

Adv Neurodev Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Although a great deal of research is conducted into the neurobiological correlates of autism, there has been no recent overview of the findings from this research in terms of how they translate to clinical practice. To provide an overview of recent literature in the fields of head size, brain volume, brain region, connectivity between brain regions, and synaptic function, as they apply to autism, with a view to informing clinical practice. Methods Major empirical and review papers on these topics from the last 30 years were identified via a search of PubMed, Google Scholar, and PsychInfo, using the descriptors ‘autism’, ‘head size’, ‘brain volume’, ‘brain region’, ‘connectivity between brain regions’, and ‘synaptic function’. To distil the key findings relevant to clinical practice, both authors conducted blind reviews, producing a set of ‘key’ papers for this purpose. Results Each field produced a number of major findings, which were then described and discussed, and translated into a table of ‘Findings’, ‘Diagnostic suggestions’ (for the clinician’s protocols), and ‘Clinical actions’ (suggestions for interactions with carers of autistic children and adults). Conclusions The stability of the research within each field varies, with some clear findings and others that are yet to be consistently verified. Despite this, some specific clinical implications for diagnosis and treatment (particularly clinician-carer interactions) are described.

show abstract

Children with ASD and Communication Regression: Examining Pre-Loss Skills and Later Language Outcomes Through the Preschool Years

Cited by 4 publications

References 47 publications

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Studies assessing domains pertaining to structural language in autism vary in reporting practices and approaches to assessment: A systematic review

Studies pertaining to language impairment in school-age autistic individuals underreport participant socio-demographics: A systematic review

Neurobiological Concomitants of Autism as Informers of Clinical Practice: a Status Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About