Download - articol autism
Infants & Young ChildrenVol. 21, No. 4, pp. 256–271Copyright c© 2008 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Communicating About AutismDecreasing Fears and StressesThrough Parent-ProfessionalPartnerships
Larry A. Gray, MA; Emily R. Msall, MA;Michael E. Msall, MD
There is increasing public and healthcare provider awareness about the early signs and develop-mental challenges of children with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs). Healthcare professionalsare guided by several major policy statements regarding the diagnosis and management of autism.There remain substantial gaps between these guidelines and families’ needs during the diagnosticprocess. This article provides a developmental and behavioral perspective for the professionalswho desire to find guideposts in task of supporting families throughout the diagnostic process ofautism. We illustrate the diversity of the ASDs using the International Classification of Function-ing, Disability and Health Model and describe developmental and behavioral perspectives aboutthe autism diagnostic process. Our overall goal is to enhance parent and professional collabora-tion in promoting the establishment of medical homes, accessing the highest quality developmen-tal assessments, and implementing comprehensive supports for parents of children with ASDs.Key words: autistic spectrum disorders, counseling, family supports, functioning
THERE is increasing awareness about theearly signs and developmental challenges
of children with autistic spectrum disor-ders (ASDs) (Chakrabarti & Fombonne, 2001;Fombonne & Chakrabarti, 2001). Major pol-
Author Affiliations: Sections of Developmental &Behavioral Pediatrics and Community HealthSciences, University of Chicago Comer Children’sHospital, Chicago, Illinois (Dr Gray and Ms Msall);and Institute of Molecular Pediatrics and KennedyCenter on Mental Retardation and the LaRabidaChildren’s Hospital, Chicago, Illinois (Dr Msall).
The authors acknowledge Dr Peter Smith, Melissa Gray,CPNP, and the University of Chicago Early InterventionTeam who provided feedback and a creative team ap-proach to advocating for quality care pathways andfamily supports. This article is dedicated to CharleyBlondis who taught all of us the value of being an opti-mal family member of a sister with genetic and autisticspectrum challenges. His untimely death highlighted thegaps between a culture of violence and a community ofcaring.
Corresponding Author: Larry A. Gray, MD, Section ofDevelopmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, University ofChicago Comer Children’s Hospital, 950E 61st St, SSCRoom 227, Chicago, IL 60637 ([email protected]).
icy statements by the American Academy ofPediatrics and the National Academy of Sci-ences have provided a template for widelydisseminated state-of-the-art strategies for di-agnosis and management (Committee on Chil-dren With Disabilities, 2001a; National Re-search Council Committee on Educational In-terventions for Children With Autism, 2001).However, there remain substantial gaps be-tween these guidelines and families’ goalsof feeling supported and accessing qualityand comprehensive early childhood services(Anders & Gardner, 2003; Renty & Roeyers,2006). The purpose of this article is to pro-vide developmental and behavioral pediatricperspectives for healthcare professionals onASDs with respect to communicating the de-velopmental diagnosis, explaining medical ad-vances to families, and providing ongoing fam-ily supports. We build on the InternationalClassification of Functioning, Disability andHealth (ICF) framework of enablement, func-tional assessment, and child and family well-being (World Health Organization, 2001). Inapproaching the developmental diagnosis of
256
Communicating About Autism 257
autism, we strive to begin a dialogue aboutthe process of developmental diagnosis inthe setting of a child’s strengths and chal-lenges while addressing the complex hopes,fears, stressors, and typical lack of family sup-ports. In addition, we discuss some of thestrengths of a developmental diagnostic ap-proach that emphasizes a spectrum of out-comes and possibilities as well as some ofthe pitfalls of a categorical diagnosis, particu-larly when families in desperation try comple-mentary interventions that may have adverseeffects. Our goal is not to review the com-plexity of accepted and/or alternative treat-ments, as this has been recently done by theNational Academy of Sciences (National Re-search Council Committee on Educational In-terventions for Children With Autism, 2001)and Hyman and Levy (2005), but to highlighthow the primary care provider positively im-pacts the diagnostic process and how ongo-ing family supports can be provided as fami-lies negotiate the complexity of managementin the birth-to-3 and early preschool years. Inthis way, we begin to develop both problem-solving strategies and approaches essentialto optimizing health, development, and func-tional competencies.
ADVANCES IN PEDIATRICS ANDDEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE
Major advances in pediatrics, child devel-opment, and developmental neuroscienceshave enhanced our understanding of childrenwith autism (Bristol, McIlvane, & Alexander,1998). These advances have included theprevention of neurodevelopmental seque-lae in children with phenylketonuria (PKU).PKU is an inborn error of metabolismwhereby children fed milk or natural pro-teins develop autism and developmentaldisabilities. Through specialized nutritionalinterventions, requiring both metabolic for-mulas and biochemical monitoring, childrenare severely restricted in their natural proteinintake. Children with PKU cannot drink cowor soy milk or eat cookies, crackers, hamburg-ers, ice cream, pizza, cheese, hot dogs, cold
cuts, or cake. The special protein formula pro-vides the equivalent of a liver transplant anddialysis machine. In all 50 states, screening forPKU takes place in newborns whereby, afterconfirmatory biochemical analysis, a special-ized biochemical formula is started.
Major progress in immunizations has ledto the near elimination of congenital rubella,measles encephalitis, and Haemophilusinfluenzae meningitis and resulting postin-fectious developmental disabilities includingASDs (Fombonne & Chakrabarti, 2001;Goldston, Gruenberg, & Lewis, 1986; Halsey,2001; Halsey, Hyman, & Conference Writ-ing Panel, 2001). Prior to these vaccines,substantial numbers of children developedintellectual disability as well as neurologicaldisorders.
Neurodiagnostic advances have includedthe early detection of visual and hearing dis-orders, communicative and social develop-mental screening tools for evaluating parentalinitial concerns, and specific assessmentscales for communication, play, social behav-iors, and adaptive skills (Ozonoff, Rogers,& Hendren, 2003). Molecular genetic ad-vances have included detection of fragileX syndrome, expanded banding karyotypesand FISH analysis for regional hot spots es-pecially on chromosomes 15 and 7, and thegenetic markers for the Rett syndrome andthe tuberous sclerosis complex. The formeris an X-linked dominant disorder whereby theMECP mutation impacts on a girl’s ability tolearn purposeful hand skills and communica-tive skills. The latter is an autosomal dom-inant neurogenetic syndrome with complexseizures, difficulty learning language, and so-cial skills, and with more than half of thechildren meeting criteria for ASDs. Despitethese molecular advances, most children withother neurodevelopmental disorders includ-ing autism cannot be given an exact etiologicexplanation.
Research networks have been establishedby National Institutes of Child Health andHuman Development and the Centers for Dis-ease Control and Prevention to understandthe epidemiology, genetic and environmental
258 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
Table 1. Stressful myths and autism
Myth Autism is caused by immunization of vulnerable children.
Reality Children not immunized with rubella, measles, mumps, hemophilic influenza,
pneumococcal, and pertussis vaccines have high rates of developmental disabilities
including deafness, blindness, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autistic spectrum disorders.
Myth Autism is a mental illness.
Reality Autism is a developmental disability impacting on understanding and use of language,
complex learning, and social communication
Myth Autism is caused by problems during labor and delivery.
Reality Prematurity and neonatal complications have not been scientifically linked to autism.
Major known etiologies associated with autism include phenylketonuria, tuberous
sclerosis, congenital rubella, fragile X syndrome, chromosomal disorders, and severe
retinopathy of prematurity.
Myth Children with autism cannot learn.
Reality Children with autism have strengths in motor skills, fine motor manipulative skills,
nonverbal intelligence, and basic adaptive skills. There is a range of communicative,
cognitive, and complex adaptive abilities. All children with autism learn.
Myth Autism is caused by poor parenting.
Reality Autism is a neurobiological disorder whereby brain systems integrating language,
complex learning, and social communication are underdeveloped.
Myth Experimental alternative medical treatments involving specialized diets, megavitamins,
and natural therapies can cure autism.
Reality Autism is not caused by food, allergies, or malabsorption. The best treatments for autism
are special education programs that build on a child’s strengths, provide family
supports, and comprehensively address communicative, learning, and behavior
challenges. Children with autism with gastrointestinal concerns should receive
competent pediatric care.
Myth There is no role for pediatric medicine for children with autism.
Reality All children require a medical home that monitors growth and development, identifies
sensory, neurological, and health conditions that can interfere with progress, helps set
comprehensive goals that optimize adaptive functioning, and advocates for proactive
community programs that provide quality family supports.
etiologies, and developmental processesinvolved in children with autism (Tager-Flusberg, Joseph, & Folstein, 2001). Inaddition, clinical research networks of mul-tidisciplinary professionals and specializeduniversity-affiliated centers of excellencehave developed to explore advances inpsychopharmacology, communicative anddevelopmental interventions, and alternativemedicine treatments (Arnold et al., 2000; Levy& Hyman, 2002; Rogers, 1998). This systemiccollaboration offers the promise for scien-tific advances, but has not quieted severalcommon misconceptions that exist regard-ing children with autism. Table 1 provides
a list of some of the most frequent mythsand the evidence-based reality that definessources of family uncertainty.
There is also another major myth that thereis an explosive epidemic of autism due tochildhood immunizations (Nelson & Bauman,2003; Murch et al., 2004; Offit & Jew, 2003).This leads to both suspicion of medicineand failure to understand that the prepon-derance of evidence supports the benefitof immunizations for the prevention of ill-ness in children with autism and preventingboth autism and severe disabilities in youngchildren. For example, without rubella vac-cine, the United States would experience
Communicating About Autism 259
epidemics of congenital rubella. Prior to thisvaccine, as many as 11 000 fetal deaths and2000 neonatal deaths occurred because ofcongenital rubella. In addition, more than20 000 newborns were affected with the con-genital rubella syndrome (Goldston et al.,1986). The sequelae of this syndrome in-clude blindness in 10%, deafness in 50%,autism in 25%, as well as mental retarda-tion, epilepsy, and cerebral palsy (Chess,1978). Rubella vaccination prevents these epi-demics. Prior to measles vaccine, significantnumbers of children died from measles pneu-monia and measles encephalitis. In 1923,more than 10 000 deaths were reported in1 year because of measles. Between 1950and 1962, almost 500 children per year diedof measles (Goldston et al., 1986). In 1982,after a decade of immunization control ef-forts, there were 2 deaths. Approximately 1 in1000 children with measles develops measlesencephalitis and more than 50% have dev-astating long-term sequelae including autism(Benda, 1952). In an era where the promise ofneuroscience has not yet brought new restora-tive treatments, immunizations are the bestway to prevent both autism and other devel-opmental disabilities.
A MODEL FOR ASSESSING ENABLEMENTAMONG CHILDREN WITH ASDs
The World Health Organization (2001) pro-posed a strengths- and supports-based modelframework for describing individuals with dis-ability. The ICF model describes a child’shealth and well-being in terms of 4 compo-nents: (1) body structures, (2) body func-tions, (3) activities, and (4) participation.Body structures are anatomical parts of thebody, such as organs and limbs, as well asstructures of the nervous, sensory, and mus-culoskeletal systems. Body functions are thephysiological functions of body systems, suchas digestion and respiration, and also includepsychological functions such as attending, re-membering, and thinking. Activities are tasksdone by children, including learning, com-municating, walking, carrying, feeding, dress-
ing, toileting, and bathing. In older children,these tasks include reading, preparing meals,shopping, and washing clothes. Participationmeans involvement in community life, such asrelationships with peers, going to school, andrecreational activities.
The ICF model accounts for contextual fac-tors in a child’s life, including environmentaland personal factors. Environmental factorsinclude policy, social and physical facilitatorsand barriers, positive and negative attitudesof others, legal protections, and discrimina-tory practices. Personal factors include age,gender, interests, and sense of self-efficacy. Avariety of preschool scenarios using the ICFmodel are illustrated in Table 2 for preschoolchildren with ASD. These scenarios includea 1-year-old girl with infantile spasms sec-ondary to tuberous sclerosis complex, 2-year-old boy who is nonverbal with autism, a3-year-old girl with blindness and develop-mental regression, and a 4-year-old boy withfragile X syndrome, challenging behaviors,and autism. The ICF model explicitly mea-sures functional strengths, social role activity,community participation, and environmentalfacilitators.
THE SPECTRUM OF AUTISM ANDRELATED PERVASIVE DEVELOPMENTALDISORDERS
Over the past 50 years, autism has beendiagnosed using different labels and criteria.We currently support the term “ASD” toencompass the formal categorical diagnosesof autistic disorder, pervasive developmentaldisorder—not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS), and Asperger’s syndrome. Currently,the 2 standardized criteria for diagnosingthese ASDs, DSM-IV and ICD-10, are similar(Volkmar & Pauls, 2003). Core diagnosticfeatures include impairments in communi-cation and social interaction coupled withrestrictive and stereotyped patterns of be-havior, interests, and activities. Onset is inthe preschool years, with delays in languageunderstanding and use, delays in joint at-tention and nonverbal skills, symbolic play
260 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008T
ab
le2
.D
imen
sio
ns
of
fun
cti
on
ing
and
par
ticip
atio
n
1-y
-old
gir
lw
ith
seiz
ure
s3
-y-o
ldgir
lw
ith
au
tism
Dim
en
sio
n:D
efi
nit
ion
an
dau
tism
2-y
-old
bo
yw
ith
au
tism
an
dvis
ual
dis
ab
ilit
y4
-y-o
ldb
oy
wit
hau
tism
Path
ophys
iolo
gy:M
ole
cu
lar
or
bio
chem
ical
mech
anis
ms
inte
rferi
ng
wit
hcellu
lar
fun
cti
on
Infa
nti
lesp
asm
sat
6m
o,
tub
ero
us
scle
rosi
sco
mp
lex
“Pre
sum
ed
”m
isw
irin
go
f
neu
rolo
gic
alsy
stem
sin
volv
ed
inla
ngu
age,d
eve
lop
men
t,
and
co
mp
lex
beh
avio
ral
regu
lati
on
75
0g,
26
-wk
co
mp
lete
d
gest
atio
n,an
dse
vere
reti
no
pat
hy
of
pre
mat
uri
ty
Init
ially
wit
hh
ypo
ton
iaan
d
co
mm
un
icat
ion
dela
ys
Impa
irm
ent:
Lo
sso
fo
rgan
stru
ctu
reo
rfu
ncti
on
Recu
rren
tse
izu
res
Co
gn
itiv
e,co
mm
un
icat
ive,an
d
neu
rob
eh
avio
rald
ysfu
ncti
on
.
No
seiz
ure
s,n
oevid
en
ce
of
frag
ile
Xsy
nd
rom
e
Vis
ual
,co
gn
itiv
e,
co
mm
un
icat
ive,an
d
neu
rob
eh
avio
ral
dys
fun
cti
on
s
Fra
gile
Xsy
nd
rom
e
dia
gn
ose
dat
age
4
Fun
ctio
na
lch
allen
ges:
Dif
ficu
lty
perf
orm
ing
an
acti
vit
y
Lac
ko
fd
eve
lop
men
talp
rogre
ss,
un
able
tow
alk
or
talk
Dif
ficu
lty
wit
hre
cep
tive
and
exp
ress
ive
lan
gu
age
tran
siti
on
s,re
peti
tive
pla
y,
die
tary
rigid
ity
Dif
ficu
lty
wit
hru
nn
ing,
rest
ricte
dvis
ual
field
s,
no
nve
rbal
,se
lf-in
juri
ou
s
beh
avio
r
Dif
ficu
lty
wit
hac
tivit
y,eye
co
nta
ct
Fun
ctio
na
lst
ren
gth
s:Perf
orm
ing
acti
vit
ies
such
asru
nn
ing,d
ress
ing,
co
mm
un
icat
ing,p
layi
ng
Tra
nsf
ers
toys
,ro
lls,
lau
gh
sLo
ves
pla
ygro
un
dan
dm
usi
c
acti
vit
ies
Clim
bin
gC
arto
on
wat
chin
g,lo
ves
Th
om
asth
eTan
k
Dis
abil
ity:
Dif
ficu
lty
perf
orm
ing
acti
vit
ies
typ
ical
for
peers
Un
stead
yin
sitt
ing,u
nab
leto
cra
wl
Un
able
togo
tore
lati
ves
Specia
led
ucat
ion
sup
po
rts,
low
-vis
ion
aid
es,
bilat
era
l
ankle
-fo
ot
ort
ho
ses,
inte
nse
beh
avio
r
man
agem
en
tp
rogra
m
Qu
alit
yp
resc
ho
olse
rvic
es
and
beh
avio
ral
man
agem
en
t
Part
icip
ati
on
:Age
app
rop
riat
ero
les,
cho
res,
ho
bb
ies,
and
spo
rts
Mo
ther
has
tota
ke
off
fro
m
wo
rkfr
eq
uen
tly
becau
seo
f
child
’sse
izu
res
Lo
ves
swim
min
gw
ith
fath
er
at
YM
CA
Ho
rseb
ack
rid
ing
YM
CA
pla
ygro
up
Soci
eta
lli
mit
ati
on
s:A
ttit
ud
inal
,le
gal
,p
olicy,
and
arch
itectu
ralb
arri
ers
Heal
thm
ain
ten
ance
org
aniz
atio
nw
illn
ot
allo
w
mag
neti
cre
son
ance
imag
ing
or
refe
rral
toa
ped
iatr
ic
ep
ilep
sycen
ter
Fra
gm
en
tati
on
betw
een
ear
ly
inte
rven
tio
nis
tsan
dex
plicit
delive
rab
les
toen
han
ce
co
mm
un
icat
ion
.Lac
ko
f
full-d
ayex
ten
ded
3-y
-old
qu
alit
yp
rogra
ms
Lac
ko
fre
spit
ese
rvic
es
and
weeken
dsu
pp
ort
s
Becau
sem
oth
er
wo
rks
ou
tsid
eth
eh
om
e,sh
e
can
no
tat
ten
dge
neti
c
sup
po
rtgro
up
s
Con
text
ua
lfa
ctors
:En
vir
on
men
talb
arri
ers
No
ou
t-o
f-h
om
ed
aycar
e
avai
lab
lefo
rch
ild
wit
h
freq
uen
tse
izu
res
Fai
lure
toh
ave
co
mm
un
icat
ion
s
stra
tegie
sfo
rn
on
verb
al
child
ren
Ch
urc
hm
em
bers
req
uest
that
child
be
kep
tat
ho
me
du
rin
gse
rvic
es
Den
ied
life
insu
ran
ce
po
licy
Communicating About Autism 261
difficulties (ie, pretend play), and difficultywith social interactions with parents andpeers. Although current reviews mandate amedical evaluation for autism (Committeeon Children With Disabilities, 2001b; Filipeket al., 2000), many children do not have anassociated or causative medical condition(Fombonne, 1999). The medical differentialdiagnosis of autism includes global develop-mental delay, developmental language disor-ders (DLDs), and severe sensori-neural hear-ing impairments. There are also many rareneurogenetic disorders that impact on highercortical functions including abstraction,problem solving, understanding viewpointsof others, information processing, and regula-tion of attention (eg, too short, too long, tooinflexible) (Rapin, 1997). In addition, among asubset of children with language regression, aspecific epilepsy pattern is present and calledthe Landau-Kleffner syndrome (Rapin &Katzman, 1998).
Some uncommon medical etiologies asso-ciated with autism include untreated PKU,tuberous sclerosis complex, retinopathy ofprematurity, congenital cytomegalovirus in-fection, and fragile X, Lesch Nyhan, andMoebius syndromes. In addition, severalgenetic disorders such as Down, Prader-Willi, Angelman, and Williams syndromes andDuchenne muscular dystrophy have higherrisks for ASDs. The lesson is not that all chil-dren with Down syndrome or Duchenne mus-cular dystrophy manifest behaviors consistentwith ASD, but that among individuals withdevelopmental and genetic vulnerability (ie,Down syndrome or Duchenne muscular dys-trophy), higher rates of classical autism arefound than the population prevalence of 1to 2 per 1000 (Yeargin-Allsopp et al., 2003)and the ASD prevalence of 4 to 6 per 1000(Szatmari, 2003; Yeargin-Allsopp et al., 2003).
EPIDEMIOLOGY OF PRESCHOOLCHILDHOOD DISABILITIES
There are improved tools for early recogni-tion and increased awareness of the preschoolpresentation of children with ASDs. With
expanded definitions of the autistic spec-trum, there are more individuals who do nothave the classical comorbidities of mentalretardation/intellectual disability. By includ-ing Asperger’s disorder in the autism spec-trum, there is increased awareness of the so-cial skill and motor coordination impairmentsthat impact on school-aged children withlearning disorders. Lastly, including preschoolchildren with challenging behaviors and com-municative and attention disorders as childrenwith autistic spectrum disorder (PDD-NOS)substantially increases the number of childreneligible for accommodations (504 Plans) andspecial education services (individualized ed-ucation programs). Thus, to understand thechanging epidemiology of preschool commu-nicative, developmental, and neurobehavioraldisorders, one must understand the back-ground prevalence of communicative andcognitive disorders in early childhood.
Communicative impairments associatedwith developmental disabilities can be clas-sified in terms of severity (high, low) andprevalence (high, low) (Accardo, 2007). Im-pairments with high severity and low preva-lence include classical (Kanner’s) autism (1–2per 1000) and significant intellectual disabili-ties (IQ < 50–55) with a prevalence of 5 per1000. Those with low severity and high preva-lence include mild intellectual disabilities(30 per 1000), language disorders (100 per1000), and learning disabilities (70–100 per1000). It is because of these latter categoriesthat as many as 20% of school-aged childrenmay qualify for special education accom-modations. Mild intellectual disabilities aredefined as an IQ of 55 to 70, with adaptiveskills more than 2 SDs below the mean,and are often detected in kindergarten andearly elementary grades. These children areindependent in communication skills and allactivities of daily living. Reading and writingskills usually advance to a fifth-grade levelbefore leveling off. Children with moderateintellectual disabilities ultimately have IQsof 40 to 55 and present with preschool lan-guage delay that later is diagnosed as a morecomplicated disability. These children are
262 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
Table 3. Language skills among children with communicative disordersa
Developmental High-functioning Low-functioning
language disorder autistic disorderb autistic disorderc
Single wordsd 18 (8.3) 17 (10.5) 20.4 (13.1)
Phrasese 27.2 (9.4) 29 (11.7) 36 (16.3)
Intelligibility 30 (10.8) 29 (12.3) 30.6 (17.2)
1-Step commandse 23.4 (9.4) 33 (12.5) 37.4 (14.7)
aValues represent age in months with (SD).bNonverbal IQ > 80.cNonverbal IQ < 80.dSignificant difference between groups P < .05.eSignificant difference between groups P < .001.
independent in all activities of daily living andeventually able to communicate basic needsto a caregiver. The major sequelae of thisgroup of disorders are difficulty in complexacademics, especially in reading paragraphsand writing book reports. A key question is:What are the differences in diagnosis anddevelopmental outcomes among childrenwith cognitive, language, and ASDs?
Rapin led a multisite multidisciplinaryproject whose purpose was to investigate theneurobiologic basis of ASD and related com-munication disorders, provide a basis for ra-tional interventions, and improve the train-ing of professionals who educate and care forthese children (Rapin & Autism and LanguageDisorders Nosology Project, 1996). The co-hort involved 487 children aged 3 to 7 years.Developmental language disorder (DLD) waspresent in 41%, ASDs were present in 36%,and intellectual disability without autism waspresent in 23%. The children were furtherdivided into high-functioning autistic disor-ders (HADs; n = 51) and low-functioningautistic disorders (LADs; n = 125). The high-functioning group had nonverbal IQs greaterthan 80, whereas the low-functioning grouphad nonverbal IQs lower than 80. All childrenreceived a comprehensive assessment of neu-ropsychologic processes including language,nonverbal intelligence, adaptive behaviors,academic abilities, and neuromotor skills.Detailed histories of prenatal, perinatal, and
postnatal events; childhood illnesses; fam-ily illnesses; developmental milestones; andgrowth, physical, and expanded neurologicexaminations were noted.
Several findings were reported. The pres-ence of developmental disabilities in parentsand siblings was generally not a significantpredictor for DLDs or ASDs. However, in fami-lies where one child had an ASD, there was anincreased risk for other children to have eitherDLDs or intellectual disability. In a smallernumber of families with one child with ASD,there was a second child with this disorder.Neonatal problems were generally not predic-tive of ASD or significantly different betweenthe DLD and the ASD.
With respect to early developmental mile-stones, no child with a DLD or an ASD wasa late walker, defined as not walking inde-pendently at age 18 months. Late walking waspresent in 25% of children with global devel-opmental delay. Difficulty with pretend playat 36 months occurred in 25% of childrenwith DLDs, 49% of children with global de-velopmental delay, and 71% of children withASDs. By age 4, only 5% of children with DLDscould not engage in pretend play whereas1 in 6 (>15%) of high-functioning childrenwith autistic disorders and 1 in 6 childrenwith global developmental delays continuedto struggle with these play skills.
Table 3 illustrates that delays in com-municating in phrases and following 1-step
Communicating About Autism 263
commands significantly differentiated chil-dren with ASD from children with DLD. Thesefindings also highlight why concerns aboutcommunicating in words and phrases and fol-lowing requests without gestures are key firstsigns for the early recognition of autism. Over-all, children with DLDs performed better inboth receptive and expressive language skillsthan children with ASD and low nonverbal in-telligence. These findings also suggest that en-hancing communication skills is one of thekey requirements for preschool interventions.
Rapin concluded that most prenatal, perina-tal, and postnatal events did not differentiatebetween DLDs, high-functioning ASD, autismwith intellectual disability, and mental retar-dation. Developmentally, 31% of the intellec-tual disability group and 56% of the autismgroup with nonverbal IQ less than 80 hadsignificantly low IQ scores (IQ < 50). Thisstudy replicated findings from the multicen-ter Collaborative Perinatal Project that peri-natal events do not play a strong causativerole in autism, intellectual disability, and DLDs(Nelson, 1991).
A DEVELOPMENTAL AND BEHAVIORALPERSPECTIVE
The role of healthcare professionals
Autism and ASDs have received a lion’sshare of public and media attention. Thereis also increased recognition that has con-tributed to higher clinical and administrativeprevalence rates over the past 2 decades. Al-though families and research scientists maydiffer on the root-causal pathways for thisincrease in prevalence (Baird et al., 2000;Fombonne, 2003) of children either diag-nosed or currently receiving specialized treat-ment for ASDs, it is timely that the primaryhealthcare professional assumes a leadershiprole in guiding and supporting families duringthe early diagnostic process.
Primary healthcare professionals, how-ever, face several obstacles. First, they areincreasingly called upon to screen for autismand other developmental disorders as partof the “well child” visits without adequate
infrastructure for time and reimbursementconsiderations (Dosreis, Weiner, Johnson,& Newschaffer, 2006). Second, althoughnational initiatives at the Center for DiseaseControl and Prevention (Autism InformationCenter) and policy statements (Committee onChildren With Disabilities, 2001b; Filipek etal., 2000) have recommended specific autismscreening tools and diagnostic standards (ICD10, DSM IV), so far very few publicationshave addressed the effectiveness of the imple-mentation of these strategies. Finally, becausethere is no laboratory or blood test for autism,the diagnosis remains open for subjectiveinterpretation of even formal diagnosticstandards. However, consensus exists thatexpert clinical judgment is more reliable thanalgorithm diagnosis in the youngest of chil-dren (Charman & Baird, 2002). These factorsseparately or in combination all serve to addobstacles and confuse the role pediatriciansand primary care providers play in the diag-nosis and management of ASDs (Committeeon Children With Disabilities, 2001b).
PRINCIPLES OF THE DIAGNOSTICASSESSMENT
Primary care providers can find guidepostsin this changing landscape by beginning withthe ICF strength-based framework and review-ing the principles of the early childhood di-agnostic assessment. One goal of this reviewis to provide a bridge for the primary careprovider as the information about the preva-lence, diagnosis, and optimal management ofASDs evolves.
Four converging factors regarding the diag-nosis of ASD highlights the importance of thisreview. Improved ability to diagnose ASDs atearlier ages (Lord, 1995; Moore & Goodson,2003) is linked with pressure to meet earlyintervention or school-based special educa-tion eligibility requirements and fueled byemerging information about the effectivenessof early identification and treatment (Lovaas,1987; McEachin, Smith, & Lovaas, 1993;Sheinkopf & Siegel, 1998). However, at thesame time, there is emerging and conflicting
264 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
Table 4. Principles of an ICF aligned developmental assessmenta
1. An integrated and functional model of child development—one that informs how best to help an
individual child—must be central to any assessment and provide a strengths-based framework
for the integration of gathered data.
2. Multiple sources of information about the child’s strengths and weaknesses (past and present)
must be solicited during the assessment.
3. The assessment should have a predictable sequence that plays to the child’s strengths and taps
his or her weaknesses. This process begins first by building alliances and a relationship with
parents, obtaining a strength-based developmental history, observing child in optimal play, and
functionally assessing areas of weakness.
4. To achieve optimal performance, the child must participate only in an assessment with his or
her most trusted caregivers.
5. The timing of child development and the factors that affect the variation of this timing should be
well known by the multidisciplinary assessment team.
6. An optimal assessment should identify the child’s strengths and weaknesses that the child brings
to the next developmental challenge and form the basis for potential intervention efforts if
needed.
8. An optimal assessment should not upset the child or place the child in a deficit-dominated or
vulnerable position.
aAdapted from Greenspan and Meisels (1996).
information about the long-term stability andsensitivity of this early diagnostic process(Charman et al., 2005; Zwaigenbaum et al.,2006). It is not known which of these factorsplays the dominant influence in the unmetneeds experienced by children with ASD.
Our clinical experience has often remindedus that the primary healthcare provider is fre-quently the first to identify and respond to afamily’s developmental concern, and it is crit-ical they understand and play a central role inoverseeing the family’s successful negotiationof the evaluation process. Equally important,the primary healthcare provider plays an in-tegrative and educational role for the familyafter the diagnostic assessment is completedand when follow-up with the referral sourceis limited.
Based on the work of Meisels and the Zeroto Three Work Group on Developmental As-sessment, the principles of an optimal de-velopmental assessment that best serve thefamily and primary care provider have beensummarized in Table 4 (Greenspan & Meisels,1996; Meisels & Atkins-Burnett, 2000; Meisels& Shonkoff, 1990; Shonkoff & Meisels, 2000).
The best practice components of a devel-opmental assessment for young child withdelays in communication, social skills, and de-velopmental competencies should first con-tain multiple sources of information about thechild’s developmental progress and functionalcapacities. This requires that not only the par-ents but also the healthcare provider’s and,possibly, the day care provider’s concerns anddescription of the child’s strengths and weak-nesses be part of the diagnostic process. A pri-mary healthcare provider should be alarmedon behalf of the family when the referral diag-nostician does not solicit or accommodate thedevelopmental history and primary care per-spective of the child from the previous wellchild visits in the diagnostic assessment.
Second, primary healthcare providersshoulder the responsibility for increasedmandates for developmental screening forASD (Council on Children With Disabilities,Section on Developmental Behavioral Pedi-atrics, Bright Futures Steering Committee, &Medical Home Initiatives for Children WithSpecial Needs Project Advisory Committee,2006). This responsibility and role increases
Communicating About Autism 265
the primary care provider’s part in thedevelopmental assessment process becausecollaborative and sequential assessmentsare central to any high-quality autism earlyidentification, assessment, and family supportmanagement program.
Third, as primary care providers andsystems of care become increasing adept inproviding a medical home for children withASD and other special healthcare needs, theyneed to join with the parents in identifying thechild’s current competencies and strengths aswell as the skills the child needs to develop tocontinue with his or her developmental pro-gression. Providing tips for “surviving yourchild’s developmental assessment” (SevenTips for Surviving Your Child’s Develop-mental Assessment assessed at http://www.zerotothree.org/site/PageServer?pagename=ter screen tips) is one way the primary careprovider can remain connected to parentsas they embark on the developmental diag-nostic process for their child and strive tomanage the child’s lifelong condition afterthe diagnostic assessment.
Finally, the ultimate goal of developmen-tal and diagnostic assessments appropriate forthe ICF strength-based model and the med-ical home is that no parents will suddenlyface as part of the diagnostic process the re-ality of uncovering a problem that they didnot suspected. When primary care fulfills itsideal role, parents are heard and supportedup to, during, and after any referral multi-disciplinary assessment. In addition, the pri-mary care provider plays an important rolefor the parents who have difficulty in relat-ing the initial behavioral or developmentalconcerns with the outcome of a diagnosis ofASD. Keeping the child and the child’s behav-ior as the central focus of the parent’s con-cern and the focus of the diagnostic processhelps parents recognize their child’s person-hood in the diagnosis process. The primarycare provider’s facilitation of parental obser-vations after the diagnostic process and un-derstanding the terms of the diagnosis of ASDis an invaluable support as parents adjust theirinternal view of their child (Baird et al., 2000).
Even when parents perceive the initial diag-nosis of ASD as unwarranted and premature,primary care providers can adopt the “work-ing diagnosis” perspective and join with thefamily to refine the diagnosis over time. It isin this context that the National Academy ofScience recommendations are most pertinent.This committee recommended that all chil-dren with any ASD, regardless of label or levelof severity, be eligible for special educationservices that comprehensively address social,cognitive, communicative, and learning skills.The therapeutic nature of this supported diag-nostic process for parents should not be un-derestimated (Parker & Zuckerman, 1990) be-cause it allows the introduction of structuredservices and for the priority of early interven-tion services to address communication andsocial skill challenges without driving parentsto risky and unproven alternative treatment(Hyman & Levy, 2005).
CAUTION ABOUT NONTRADITIONALTHERAPIES
Parents of children with autism are bar-raged with promises of miracle cures, drugtherapies, and nontraditional therapies tocure their child (Nickel, 1996; Tanguay, 2000).Many times, caregivers are willing to try any-thing to help their child. Nonethical promot-ers of nonscientific therapies use commonploys to seduce desperate parents into tryingtheir treatments. Some common approachesinclude exploiting the natural fear of disease,preying on the uncertainty about traditionalmedical care, promising painless and naturaltreatments, and claiming miraculous scientificbreakthrough and developmental cures.
One promise of a scientific breakthroughwas the use of secretin to cure autism. Acase study was reported in the literaturethat 1 dose of intravenous secretin costingmore than $1000 successfully eliminatedsymptoms in a child with autism (Horvathet al., 1998). Several scientific studies havebeen conducted since the original case study.One undertaken by Coniglio et al. (2001) in-volved children aged 3 to 10 years diagnosed
266 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
using DSM-IV criteria for autism. The goalwas to determine whether a single dose ofintravenously administered secretin couldimprove communication and socializationskills in children with autism. Subjects wererandomly divided into treatment and placebogroups. The Childhood Autism Rating Scaleand Preschool Language Scale–3 (PLS-3)were administered at baseline, 3 weeks, and6 weeks after treatment. In addition, caretak-ers completed the Parent Perception Surveyand the Gilliam Autistic Rating Scale andwere asked several study-specific questionsincluding “Do you believe your child receivedsecretin? Have you noticed any changes inyour child’s symptoms?” Results showed thatchildren who did not receive secretin mademore communicative, behavioral, and devel-opmental progress using these standardizedoutcome measures.
In another study, Sandler et al. (1999) ran-domly assigned 60 children aged 3 to 14 yearsto either a single treatment secretin groupor a placebo control group. DSM-IV criteriawere used to diagnose autism (Sandler et al.,1999). If autism criteria were not met, PDDwas diagnosed. Subjects were administeredthe Childhood Autism Rating Scale and theAutism Behavior Checklist at baseline and ata 4-week follow-up. Again, the children as-signed to the placebo treatment improved onthese behavioral measures more than the se-cretin group. To date, there have been sev-eral other secretin trials involving more than700 children with autism (Dunn-Geier et al.,2000; Lightdale et al., 2001; Owley & Steele,1999; Roberts et al., 2001). In no trial was se-cretin a miracle cure. However, in all trials, im-provement occurred over time in all childrenwith ASDs, thus demonstrating that all chil-dren with ASDs learn. Despite the lack of evi-dence for secretin’s therapeutic use and evenafter being presented the study’s negative re-sults, parents continued to ask the study doc-tors for ongoing secretin treatment.
Primary care professionals need to em-brace the passion parents demonstrate in theirsearch for supports to their afflicted child.Rather than a punitive remark or avoiding a
discussion about an alternative treatment, pri-mary healthcare professionals can play a pos-itive role by providing families valuable infor-mation to evaluate any alternative treatment.We have found some useful Web sites andhandouts to offer to families when contem-plating the complex issue of and risks associ-ated with alternative treatments.
1. http://www.asatonline.org/ (Associat-ion for Science in Autism Treatment,n.d.)
2. http://www.autismresearchnetwork.org/AN/default.aspx (National Institutes ofHealth Autism Research Network, 2007)
3. Parent handouts have been developed byThe Autism Program. These include:
a. Current Interventions in Autism—A Brief Analysis at http://www.theautismprogram.org/autismtreatments.asp (The Autism Program,n.d.-a)
b. Tips for Working With ChildrenWith Autism Spectrum Disordersat http://www.theautismprogram.org/tips.asp (The Autism Program,n.d.-d)
c. Top 10 Things to RememberWhen Working With Children WithAutism Spectrum Disorders athttp://www.theautismprogram.org/top10.asp (The Autism Program,n.d.-e)
d. Tips for Daily Life—Visitingthe Dentist at http://www.theautismprogram.org/dentist.asp(The Autism Program, n.d.-b)
e. Tips for Daily Life—Toilet Trainingat http://www.theautismprogram.org/toilet.asp (The Autism Program,n.d.-c)
ADMINISTRATIVE AND FUNDINGREALITIES
The primary healthcare provider, as thecentral figure in the medical home and be-cause of his or her unique training, interest,and commitment, is perfectly positioned to
Communicating About Autism 267
understand and support the special family cir-cumstances that each family brings with achild who has developmental differences. Un-fortunately, Medicaid and private party payersdo not value this expertise or commitmentwith their reimbursement schemes. Primaryhealthcare providers, pediatricians, and nursepractitioners and family practice specificallyare best positioned to involve family mem-bers in planning the evaluation of a child’sdevelopment. They also foster respectfulcommunication between parents, referrals tosubspecialty physicians, and allied healthcareand educational professionals. Helping fami-lies integrate the different pieces of an assess-ment for ASDs (genetics, hearing, neurologic,and educational) is one valuable mandate ofthe medical home.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, andits national medical home initiative (AmericanAcademy of Pediatrics: The National Centerof Medical Home Initiatives for Children WithSpecial Needs, n.d.), has advocated a model ofprimary care delivery that keeps the primaryhealthcare professional central to the processof identification, family understanding, pro-fessional referrals, and diagnostic assessmentfor children with developmental differences.At the same time, this initiatives at theAmerican Academy of Pediatrics endeavors tofind political and legal avenues to address thenegative financial setbacks that most primarycare providers risk when they choose to main-tain this central role for their patients andfamilies. The American Academy of Pediatricshas a toolkit as well as updated brochuresto enhance the primary care provider’sskills (see www.aap.org). In addition, theNational Medical Home Autism Initiative atthe University of Wisconsin and the Maternaland Child Health Bureau (MCHB) is evidence,in part, of the way national organizations andfederal agencies are promoting and providingtechnical assistance to pediatric healthcareproviders who desire to work with otherpartners in the community to serve childrenwith autism (Fig. 1).
Adopting the ICF model with a strengths-and supports-based framework for describing
preschool children with ASD is a perfectmatch for primary healthcare professionals. Incollaboration with the larger community ofproviders, the key goal is to provide compre-hensive coordinated and compassionate carefor children and families faced with the chal-lenges of ASDs.
Building on the ICF framework of enable-ment, primary care providers will have thestructure to communicate with sensitivity andmutual respect information about the devel-opmental diagnosis, explain current medicalunderstanding of autism to families, and pro-vide ongoing family support. Only then willfamilies have the confidence to increase theirrequests to primary care providers for guid-ance about the range of traditional and non-traditional autistic-specific treatments avail-able. In addition, this framework allows thephysician to prioritize interventions that pro-mote child functioning and enhance familywell-being.
The blending of the ICF framework withinthe primary care structure of the medicalhome can serve to reveal the added valueof decreasing fears and stresses through ef-ficient parent-professional partnerships. Thisadded value reflects the teamwork of pro-fessional and nonprofessional office staff to-ward family-centered care management andenhanced communication. These models alsorecognize the wide range of differences inchallenges families of children with autismface and the increased time and effort re-quired for the ongoing monitoring of thechild’s progress and family adaptation.
CONCLUSION
The major need for families is to feel thattheir primary healthcare professional listensto their concerns and understands the multi-threaded information required for a diagnos-tic assessment. Parents also need to be contin-ually supported in accessing comprehensivesystems of early intervention and preschooleducation on behalf of their child. It is mostimportant to view ASD as a developmentaldisorder whereby interventions to enhance
268 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
Figure 1. National Medical Home Autism Initiative: Key functions and partners (Waisman Center, 2006).
communication, promote adaptive skills, andbuild on the child’s strengths occur. It is adangerous practice to assume that there is amagic bullet that will dramatically cause thechild to be suddenly typical. Unfortunately,the complexity of human language and the de-velopmental neurobiology of autism do no al-low for cures with injections of miracle drugsor nutrition supplements (Coury & Nash,2003; Ozonoff et al., 2003; Volkmar & Pauls,2003). Instead, ASD allows us to understandhow all children can benefit from comprehen-sive and quality supports that enhance com-munication, adaptive skills, and functional in-dependence at home and in the community. Ifthe parent or the child experience challengesthat are too demanding or out of control,they will not understand the current behaviorand educational technologies that can make a
difference (Rogers, 1998; Siegel, 1996, 2003;Smith, Eikeseth, Klevstrand, & Lovaas, 1997;Wetherby & Prizant, 2000; Wing, 2001). Therole of the physician is not to be an expert onall educational practices but to know the hardtask of parenting children who are motoricallyable but communicatively challenged and be-haviorally unpredictable. Attention to familystresses and daily management supports canmake a difference at home, school, and in thecommunity. In this way families can undertakethe multidimensional management strategiesthat promote functional, communicative, so-cial, and adaptive skills. They then can cele-brate with professionals the strengths of theirchild’s unique way of experiencing the worldand set goals that promote steps to indepen-dence, and when challenges persist, knowthey will not be abandoned.
Communicating About Autism 269
REFERENCES
Accardo, P. J. (2007). Developmental disabilities ininfancy and childhood (3rd ed.). Baltimore: P.H.
Brookes.
American Academy of Pediatrics: The National Cen-
ter of Medical Home Initiatives for Children With
Special Needs. Retrieved July 10, 2007, from
http://www.medicalhomeinfo.org/
Anders, T. F., Gardner, C., Jr., & Gardner, S. E. (2003).
Professional-parent collaboration—The M.I.N.D. In-
stitute Model. In: S. Ozonoff, S. J. Rogers, & R. L.
Hendren (Eds.), Autism spectrum disorders—Aresearch review for practitioners (pp. 227–238).
Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing
Inc.
Arnold, L. E., Aman, M. G., Martin, A., Collier-Crespin, A.,
Vitiello, B., Tierney, E., et al. (2000). Assessment in
multisite randomized clinical trials of patients with
autistic disorder: The Autism RUPP Network. Journalof Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30(2), 99–
111.
Association for Science in Autism Treatment. (n.d.). Re-
trieved July 16, 2007 http://www.asatonline.org
Baird, G., Charman, T., Baron-Cohen, S., Cox, A.,
Swettenham, J., Wheelwright, S., et al. (2000). A
screening instrument for autism at 18 months of age:
A 6-year follow-up study. Journal of the AmericanAcademy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(6),
694–702.
Benda, C. E. (1952). Developmental disorders of men-tation and cerebral palsies. New York: Grune &
Stratton.
Bristol, M., McIlvane, W. J., & Alexander, D. (1998).
Autism research: Current context and future direc-
tion. Mental Retardation and Developmental Dis-abilities Research Reviews, 4(2), 61–64.
Chakrabarti, S., & Fombonne, E. (2001). Pervasive de-
velopmental disorders in preschool children. TheJournal of the American Medical Association,285(24), 3093–3099. Comment in: The Journalof the American Medical Association, 2001 June
27;285(24):3141–3142; PMID: 11427145.
Charman, T., & Baird, G. (2002). Practitioner review:
Diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder in 2- and 3-
year-old children. Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry, 43(3), 289–305.
Charman, T., Taylor, E., Drew, A., Cockerill, H., Brown,
J.-A., & Baird, G. (2005). Outcome at 7 years of chil-
dren diagnosed with autism at age 2: Predictive valid-
ity of assessments conducted at 2 and 3 years of age
and pattern of symptom change over time. Journalof Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(5), 500–
513.
Chess, S. (1978). Behavioral consequences of congenitalrubella. St. Louis: CV Mosby.
Committee on Children With Disabilities. (2001a). The
pediatrician’s role in the diagnosis and management
of autistic spectrum disorder in children. Pediatrics,107(5), 1221–1226.
Committee on Children With Disabilities. (2001b). Tech-
nical report: The pediatrician’s role in the diagno-
sis and management of autistic spectrum disorder in
children. Pediatrics, 107(5), E85.
Coniglio, S. J., Lewis, J. D., Lang, C., Burns, T. G., Subhani-
Siddique, R., Weintraub, A., et al. (2001). A random-
ized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of single-
dose intravenous secretin as treatment for children
with autism. Journal of Pediatrics, 138(5), 649–
655.
Council on Children With Disabilities, Section on De-
velopmental Behavioral Pediatrics, Bright Futures
Steering Committee, & Medical Home Initiatives for
Children With Special Needs Project Advisory Com-
mittee. (2006). Identifying infants and young chil-
dren with developmental disorders in the medical
home: An algorithm for developmental surveillance
and screening. Pediatrics, 118(1), 405–420.
Coury, D. L., & Nash, P. L. (2003). Epidemiology and etiol-
ogy of autistic spectrum disorders difficult to deter-
mine. Pediatric Annals, 32(10), 696–700.
Dosreis, S. P. D., Weiner, C. L. B. S., Johnson, L., &
Newschaffer, C. J. P. D. (2006). Autism spectrum dis-
order screening and management practices among
general pediatric providers. Journal of Developmen-tal & Behavioral Pediatrics, 27(2), S88–S94.
Dunn-Geier, J., Ho, H. H., Auersperg, E., Doyle, D., Eaves,
L., Matsuba, C., et al. (2000). Effect of secretin
on children with autism: A randomized controlled
trial. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology,42(12), 796–802.
Filipek, P. A., Accardo, P. J., Ashwal, S., Baranek, G. T.,
Cook, E. H., Jr., Dawson, G., et al. (2000). Practice
parameter: Screening and diagnosis of autism: Re-
port of the quality standards subcommittee of the
American Academy of Neurology and the Child Neu-
rology Society. Neurology, 55(4), 468–479.
Fombonne, E. (1999). The epidemiology of autism: A re-
view. Psychological Medicine, 29(4), 769–786.
Fombonne, E. (2003). Epidemiological surveys of autism
and other pervasive developmental disorders: An up-
date. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disor-ders, 33(4), 365–382.
Fombonne, E., & Chakrabarti, S. (2001). No evidence
for a new variant of measles-mumps-rubella-induced
autism. Pediatrics, 108(4), E58.
Goldston, S. E., Gruenberg, E. M., & Lewis, C. (1986). Vac-cinating against brain syndromes: The campaignagainst measles and rubella. New York: Oxford Uni-
versity Press.
Greenspan, S., & Meisels, S. (1996). Toward a new
vision for the developmental assessment of infants
and young children. In: S. Meisels & E. Fenichel
(Eds.), New visions for the developmental
270 INFANTS & YOUNG CHILDREN/OCTOBER–DECEMBER 2008
assessment of infants and young children(pp. 11–26). Washington, DC: Zero to Three.
Halsey, N. A. (2001). Safety of combination vaccines: Per-
ception versus reality. Pediatric Infectious DiseaseJournal, 20(11 Suppl.), S40–S44.
Halsey, N. A., Hyman, S. L., & Conference Writing Panel.
(2001). Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autistic
spectrum disorder: Report from the New Challenges
in Childhood Immunizations Conference convened
in Oak Brook, Illinois, June 12–13, 2000. Pediatrics,107(5), E84.
Horvath, K., Stefanatos, G., Sokolski, K. N., Wachtel, R.,
Nabors, L., & Tildon, J. T. (1998). Improved social
and language skills after secretin administration in pa-
tients with autistic spectrum disorders. Journal ofthe Association for Academic Minority Physicians,9(1), 9–15.
Hyman, S. L., & Levy, S. E. (2005). Introduction: Novel
therapies in developmental disabilities—Hope, rea-
son, and evidence. Mental Retardation and De-velopmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 11(2),
107–109.
Levy, S. E., & Hyman, S. L. (2002). Alternative/
complementary approaches to treatment of children
with autistic spectrum disorders. Infants & YoungChildren, 14(3), 33–42.
Lightdale, J. R., Hayer, C., Duer, A., Lind-White, C.,
Jenkins, S., Siegel, B., et al. (2001). Effects of intra-
venous secretin on language and behavior of children
with autism and gastrointestinal symptoms: A single-
blinded, open-label pilot study. Pediatrics, 108(5),
E90.
Lord, C. (1995). Follow-up of two-year-olds referred for
possible autism. Journal of Child Psychology andPsychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 36(8), 1365–
1382.
Lovaas, O. I. (1987). Behavioral treatment and normal ed-
ucational and intellectual functioning in young autis-
tic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psy-chology, 55(1), 3–9.
McEachin, J. J., Smith, T., & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-term
outcome for children with autism who received early
intensive behavioral treatment. American Journal ofMental Retardation, 97(4), 359–72; discussion 373–
391.
Meisels, S. J., & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2000). The elements
of early childhood assessment. In J. P. Shonkoff &
S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood
intervention (pp. 231–257). New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Meisels, S. J., & Shonkoff, J. P. (1990). Handbook of earlychildhood intervention. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Moore, V., & Goodson, S. (2003). How well does early
diagnosis of autism stand the test of time? Follow-
up study of children assessed for autism at age 2 and
development of an early diagnostic service. Autism,7(1), 47–63.
Murch, S. H., Anthony, A., Casson, D. H., Malik, M.,
Berelowitz, M., Dhillon, A. P., et al. (2004). Retrac-
tion of an interpretation. Lancet, 363(9411), 750.
National Institutes of Health Autism Research Net-
work. (2007). Retrieved July 16, 2007, from http://
www.autismresearchnetwork.org/AN/default.aspx
National Research Council Committee on Educational In-
terventions for Children With Autism. (2001). Edu-cating children with autism. Washington, DC: Na-
tional Academies Press.
Nelson, K. B. (1991). Prenatal and perinatal factorsin the etiology of autism. Elk Grove Village, IL:
American Academy of Pediatrics.
Nelson, K. B., & Bauman, M. L. (2003). Thimerosal and
autism? Pediatrics, 111(3), 674–679.
Nickel, R. E. (1996). Controversial therapies for young
children with developmental disabilities. Infants &Young Children, 8(4), 29–40.
Offit, P. A., & Jew, R. K. (2003). Addressing parents’ con-
cerns: Do vaccines contain harmful preservatives, ad-
juvants, additives, or residuals? Pediatrics, 112(6),
1394–1401.
Owley, T., & Steele, E. (1999). A double-blind, placebo-
controlled trial of secretin for the treatment of autis-
tic disorder. Medical General, 6, E2.
Ozonoff, S., Rogers, S. J., & Hendren, R. L. (2003). Autismspectrum disorders: A research review for practi-tioners. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Pub-
lishing Inc.
Parker, S., & Zuckerman, B. (1990). Therapeutic aspects
of the assessment process. In S. J. Meisels (Ed.),
Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp.
350–370). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Rapin, I. (1997). Autism. The New England Journal ofMedicine, 337(2), 97–104. See comment in: TheNew England Journal of Medicine. 1997 November
20;337(21):1555–1556; author reply 1556–1557;
PMID: 9380125.
Rapin, I., & Autism and Language Disorders Nosology
Project. (1996). Preschool children with inadequatecommunication: Developmental language disor-der, autism, low IQ. London: MacKeith.
Rapin, I., & Katzman, R. (1998). Neurobiology of autism.
Annals of Neurology, 43(1), 7–14.
Renty, J., & Roeyers, H. (2006). Satisfaction with formal
support and education for children with autism spec-
trum disorder: The voices of the parents. Child: Care,Health and Development, 32(3), 371–385.
Roberts, W., Weaver, L., Brian, J., Bryson, S., Emelianova,
S., Griffiths, A. M., et al. (2001). Repeated doses
of porcine secretin in the treatment of autism:
A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Pediatrics,107(5), E71. See comment in: Evidence-Based Men-tal Health. 2002 February;5(1):22; PMID: 11915825.
Rogers, S. J. (1998). Neuropsychology of autism in young
children and its implications for early intervention.
Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabili-ties Research Reviews, 4(2), 104–112.
Communicating About Autism 271
Sandler, A. D., Sutton, K. A., DeWeese, J., Girardi, M.
A., Sheppard, V., & Bodfish, J. W. (1999). Lack of
benefit of a single dose of synthetic human se-
cretin in the treatment of autism and pervasive de-
velopmental disorder. The New England Journal ofMedicine, 341(24), 1801–1806. See comments in:
The New England Journal of Medicine. 1999 De-
cember 9;341(24):1842–1844; PMID: 10588973, and
The New England Journal of Medicine. 2000 April
20;342(16):1216–1217; author reply 1218; PMID:
10777377 and PMID: 10777376 C (TRUNCATED).
Sheinkopf, S. J., & Siegel, B. (1998). Home-based behav-
ioral treatment of young children with autism. Jour-nal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 28(1),
15–23.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Meisels, S. J. (2000). Handbook of earlychildhood intervention. New York: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Siegel, B. (1996). The world of the autistic child: Under-standing and treating autistic spectrum disorders.New York: Oxford University Press.
Siegel, B. (2003). Helping children with autism learn:Treatment approaches for parents and profession-als. New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, T., Eikeseth, S., Klevstrand, M., & Lovaas, O. I.
(1997). Intensive behavioral treatment for preschool-
ers with severe mental retardation and pervasive de-
velopmental disorder. American Journal of MentalRetardation, 102(3), 238–249.
Szatmari, P. (2003). The cause of autism spectrum
disorders. British Medical Journal, 326, 173–
174.
Tager-Flusberg, H., Joseph, R., & Folstein, S. (2001). Cur-
rent directions in research on autism. Mental Re-tardation and Developmental Disabilities ResearchReviews, 7(1), 21–29.
Tanguay, P. E. (2000). Pervasive developmental disorders:
A 10-year review. Journal of American Academy ofChild Psychology, 39(9), 1079–1095.
The Autism Program (n.d.-a). Current interventionsin autism—A brief analysis. Retrieved July 16,
2007, from http://www.theautismprogram.org/
autismtreatments.asp
The Autism Program. (n.d.-b). Tips for daily life—Visiting the dentist. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from
http://www.theautismprogram.org/dentist.asp
The Autism Program. (n.d.-c). Tips for daily life—Toilet training. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from
http://www.theautismprogram.org/toilet.asp
The Autism Program. (n.d.-d). Tips for working withchildren with autism spectrum disorders. Retrieved
July 16, 2007, from http://www.theautismprogram.
org/tips.asp
The Autism Program. (n.d.-e). Top 10 things to re-member when working with children with autismspectrum disorders. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from
http://www.theautismprogram.org/top10.asp
Volkmar, F. R., & Pauls, D. (2003). Autism. Lancet,362(9390), 1133–1141. Erratum in: Lancet. 2004
January 17;363(9404):250.
Waisman Center. (2006). National Medical HomeAutism Initiative. Retrieved July 2, 2007, from
http://www.waisman.wisc.edu/nmhai/FRAMEWORK.
HTML
Wetherby, A. M., & Prizant, B. M. (2000). Autism spec-trum disorders: A transactional developmental per-spective. Baltimore: P.H. Brookes.
Wing, L. (2001). The autistic spectrum: A parents’ guideto understanding and helping your child. Berkeley,
CA: Ulysses Press.
World Health Organization. (2001). International Classi-fication of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF.
Geneva: Author.
Yeargin-Allsopp, M., Rice, C., Karapurkar, T., Doernberg,
N., Boyle, C., & Murphy, C. (2003). Prevalence of
autism in a US metropolitan area. Journal of theAmerican Medical Association, 289(1), 49–55.
Zwaigenbaum, L. M. D., Bryson, S. P. D., Roberts, W. M.
D., Brian, J. P. D., Szatmari, P. M. D., & Smith, I. P. D.
(2006). Stability of 18-month diagnostic assessment
for autism. Pediatric Academic Societies, E-PSA59,
5425.1.
Current articles- http://depts.washington.edu/isei/iyc/iyc_comments.html