Untitled

Abstract

The predictive power of age and IQ at time of admission to an intensive treatment program using applied behavior analysis were examined in a 4- to 6-year follow-up of educational placement. Twenty-seven children with autistic disorder who were between the ages of 31 and 65 months and had IQs on the Stanford Binet between 35 and 109 at time of admission to the Douglass Developmental Disabilities Center were followed up 4 to 6 years after they left the preschool. The results showed that having a higher IQ at intake (M = 78) and being of younger age (M = 42 months) were both predictive of being in a regular education class after discharge, whereas having a lower IQ (M = 46) and being older at intake (M = 54 months) were closely related to placement in a special education classroom. The results are interpreted as pointing to the need for very early intervention for children with Autistic Disorder. It is also emphasized that older children and those with lower IQs in the present study showed measurable gains in IQ from treatment. The data should not be taken to suggest that children older than 4 years of age do not merit high quality treatment.

Characteristics of Children Who Lost the Diagnosis of Autism: A Sample from Istanbul, Turkey

“…Therefore, this study failed to show that an earlier age at intake leads to an earlier loss of diagnosis. Harris and Handleman [38] examined the predictive power of age and IQ at the time of admission to intensive behavioral treatment. They reported that a younger age and a higher IQ were predictive of placement in a regular education class [38].…”

“…Harris and Handleman [38] examined the predictive power of age and IQ at the time of admission to intensive behavioral treatment. They reported that a younger age and a higher IQ were predictive of placement in a regular education class [38]. Turner [35] examined the age 2 predictor of outcome at age 9 and reported that 70% of the children diagnosed prior to the age of 30 months had “more optimal” outcomes, while only 28% of children diagnosed older than 30 months achieved “more optimal” outcomes.…”

Potential neural mechanisms underlying the effectiveness of early intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder

“…Studies of early intensive behavioral intervention for young children with ASD embody such integrated approaches and reveal substantial improvements for a large subset of children, particularly when initiated during toddlerhood or preschool age and continued for 2 to 3 years (Wallace & Rogers, 2010). Such behaviorally based interventions are associated with improvements in the domains of cognition, adaptive behavior, and language (Rogers & Vismara, 2008), suggesting a certain level of plasticity in these aspects of development, especially when intervention is started early (Drew et al, 2002; Harris & Handelman, 2000). …”

The Influence of Demographic Factors on the Identification of Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Review and Call for Research

“…Receiving an accurate autism spectrum disorder (ASD) diagnosis at a younger age is associated with more positive functional outcomes in later life (Harris and Handleman 2000;Turner et al 2006), presumably as a result of the relationship between ASD diagnosis and receipt of targeted treatments. Early intervention is a key prognostic indicator of more positive outcomes in youth with ASD (Corsello 2005;Itzchak and Zachor 2011;Woods and Wetherby 2003).…”