Epidemiological studies investigating the prevalence of autism have increased in recent years, within the United States and abroad. However, statistics as to how many of those children may also have a comorbid hearing loss is lacking. The prevalence of school-administrator reported diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (clinical diagnosis [DSM-IV] and/or IDEA classification) among children with hearing loss in the US was estimated from the 2009–2010 Annual Survey of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children and Youth conducted by the Gallaudet Research Institute. Results indicate that during the 2009–2010 school year 1 in 59 children (specifically 8-year olds) with hearing loss were also receiving services for autism; considerably higher, than reported national estimates of 1 in 91 (Koganet al. in Pediatrics 124(4):1–8, 2009) and 1 in 110 (CDC 2007) for hearing children. Significantly more children with profound hearing loss had a comorbid diagnosis of autism than those with milder forms of hearing loss. These results are discussed, while highlighting the need for increased awareness and research in a population that has thus far received little services or attention.

There is much opportunity for further inquiry in the field of intellectual assessment as it applies to children who are deaf or hard of hearing, as many measures have not been closely scrutinized for their appropriate use with this population. Clinicians must recognize inherent difficulties with intellectual assessment measures with children who are deaf or hard of hearing and issues in providing for an accessible and accurate administration of test items.

Students who have a hearing loss and a comorbid diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have multiple obstacles to overcome. Using Gallaudet Research Institute data, Szymanski, Brice, Lam, and Hotto calculated 1 deaf student in 59 received services for both a hearing loss and an ASD (Szymanski, Brice, Lam, & Hotto, 2012). Teachers of the deaf (TOD) in a Midwestern state completed a survey (N = 68) to indicate familiarity with evidence-based practices (EBP) from the field of ASD in order to confirm or reject the hypothesis that they would not report familiarity with these practices. Further analyses explored use and perceived effectiveness of EBP for those TOD who had familiarity with the instructional practices. Results of the study indicated that there was wide variance in TOD familiarity, use, and perceived effectiveness of the EBP.

No abstract

No abstract