A longitudinal study of parent‐reported sensory responsiveness in toddlers at‐risk for autism

Wolff, Jason J.; Dimian, Adele F.; Botteron, Kelly N.; Dager, Stephen R.; Elison, Jed T.; Estes, Annette; Hazlett, Heather C.; Schultz, Robert T.; Zwaigenbaum, Lonnie; Piven, Joseph

doi:10.1111/jcpp.12978

Cited by 59 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the first clinical features of ASD are atypical responses to or interests in sensory stimuli [ 3 ]. These changes in sensory function likely result from the diminished ability to filter sensory information [ 4 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altered brain-wide auditory networks in a zebrafish model of fragile X syndrome

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Loss or disrupted expression of the FMR1 gene causes fragile X syndrome (FXS), the most common monogenetic form of autism in humans. Although disruptions in sensory processing are core traits of FXS and autism, the neural underpinnings of these phenotypes are poorly understood. Using calcium imaging to record from the entire brain at cellular resolution, we investigated neuronal responses to visual and auditory stimuli in larval zebrafish, using fmr1 mutants to model FXS. The purpose of this study was to model the alterations of sensory networks, brain-wide and at cellular resolution, that underlie the sensory aspects of FXS and autism. Results Combining functional analyses with the neurons’ anatomical positions, we found that fmr1−/− animals have normal responses to visual motion. However, there were several alterations in the auditory processing of fmr1−/− animals. Auditory responses were more plentiful in hindbrain structures and in the thalamus. The thalamus, torus semicircularis, and tegmentum had clusters of neurons that responded more strongly to auditory stimuli in fmr1−/− animals. Functional connectivity networks showed more inter-regional connectivity at lower sound intensities (a − 3 to − 6 dB shift) in fmr1−/− larvae compared to wild type. Finally, the decoding capacities of specific components of the ascending auditory pathway were altered: the octavolateralis nucleus within the hindbrain had significantly stronger decoding of auditory amplitude while the telencephalon had weaker decoding in fmr1−/− mutants. Conclusions We demonstrated that fmr1−/− larvae are hypersensitive to sound, with a 3–6 dB shift in sensitivity, and identified four sub-cortical brain regions with more plentiful responses and/or greater response strengths to auditory stimuli. We also constructed an experimentally supported model of how auditory information may be processed brain-wide in fmr1−/− larvae. Our model suggests that the early ascending auditory pathway transmits more auditory information, with less filtering and modulation, in this model of FXS.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Altered brain-wide auditory networks in a zebrafish model of fragile X syndrome

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many similar instruments, for example, the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT; Robins et al, 2014), Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQs; Bricker et al, 1999), and Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales (CSBS; Wetherby & Prizant, 2002), largely focus on typical and atypical language development and social-communicative functioning in early childhood. However, recent findings suggest that many, although not all, infants at risk for developing ASD show atypical early sensory behavior (Turner-Brown et al, 2013; Wolff et al, 2019) and this behavior may serve as an early predictor of later ASD diagnosis (Sacrey et al, 2018). Considering a high prevalence of atypical sensory features in ASD (DuBois et al, 2017) and their recognition as important features of ASD diagnostic criteria in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed., text rev.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Construct validity of the First-Year Inventory (FYI Version 2.0) in 12-month-olds at high-risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder

Lee

Vigen

Zwaigenbaum

et al. 2020

Autism

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the construct validity of the First-Year Inventory 2.0 with respect to other established instruments in a sample of high-risk infant siblings of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. The First-Year Inventory 2.0 is a parent-report screening instrument designed to identify 12-month-old infants at risk for an eventual diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder and consists of two domains: Social-Communication and Sensory-Regulatory. Although the First-Year Inventory 2.0’s screening psychometrics have been examined, its construct validity has not been investigated. In a sample of 112 high-risk 12-month-olds, we examined the First-Year Inventory 2.0’s associations with the Autism Observation Scale for Infants, an observer-based Autism Spectrum Disorder screener, and with other developmental instruments measuring similar areas in social communication and regulatory functioning in young children. Findings generally supported the First-Year Inventory 2.0 associations with other instruments in expected ways. The First-Year Inventory 2.0 Social-Communication domain was notably associated with the Autism Observation Scale for Infant’s total score and with language and communication domains of the Vineland and the Mullen. The Sensory-Regulatory domain showed minimal associations with other instruments that only had a few sensory items. Considering different objectives and strengths of assessments, researchers and clinicians are encouraged to utilize a variety of instruments in a comprehensive evaluation of a child. Lay abstract The First-Year Inventory 2.0 is a parent-report screening instrument designed to identify 12-month-old infants at risk for an eventual diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder. This instrument focuses on Social-Communication and Sensory-Regulatory areas of infant behavior. Although the First-Year Inventory 2.0 screening performance has been previously studied, its validity has not been examined. Establishing validity of an instrument is important because it supports the effectiveness and the reliability of the instrument. In this study, we examined relationship between the First-Year Inventory 2.0 (Social-Communication and Sensory-Regulatory areas) and other instruments that measure similar areas of infant behavior in a sample of high-risk infant siblings of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder. These other instruments share some common aims and theoretical areas with the First-Year Inventory 2.0: the Autism Observation Scale for Infants, the Mullen Scales of Early Learning, the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II, and the Infant Behavior Questionnaire. Findings generally supported the validity of the First-Year Inventory 2.0 with other instruments. In particular, the Social-Communication area of the First-Year Inventory 2.0 showed greater commonality with other instruments than in the Sensory-Regulatory area. The Sensory-Regulatory area seemed to be a unique feature of the First-Year Inventory 2.0 instrument. Considering different aims and strengths of assessments, researchers and clinicians are encouraged to utilize a variety of instruments in a comprehensive evaluation of a child.

show abstract

“…Germani et al [44] found that EL-ASD showed abnormalities in the auditory processing compared to EL-TD and TL while no difference was found in the visual, tactile, vestibular and oral domains. On the contrary, Wolff et al [53] reported anomalies in all sensory subdomains.…”

Section: Sensory Processing (N = 5; Table 7)mentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Similarly, the use of body and play materials in a self-stimulatory way at 12 months was predictive towards ASD [33]. In Germani et al [44] sensory abnormalities at 24 months in EL-ASD were limited to the auditory domain, while Wolff et al [53] extended them to all sensory domains. These results might suggest that sensory atypicalities might be a specific trait for children who develop ASD not seen at a sub-threshold level.…”

Section: Sensory Domainmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Brian et al [46] and Zwaigenbaum et al [33] focused on atypical sensory behaviours and interests (i.e. use of play materials in a selfstimulatory way) observed during the administration of the At 14 m EL-ASD showed the same score in visual processing as EL-TD EL-ASD showed a lower increase over time than EL-TD EL-ASD showed the lowest increase over time AOSI [65], Wolff et al [53] used the Sensory Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ; [74]), a parent-report measure of behavioural responses to a range of common sensory stimuli and Sacrey et al [19] based their assessment on reports of parent's sensory concerns from an interview that they had developed. Sacrey et al [19] reported parents' first concerns in sounds, texture and visual inspection in EL-ASD by 6 months compared to parents of EL-TD and TL (who did not differ) while Wolff et al [53] reported parents' concerns from 12 months, age at which parents of EL-ASD observed higher tactile and hyper-sensory responsivity, as compared to parents of EL-TD and TL, with differences increasing from 12 to 24 months in all sensory domains.…”

Section: Sensory Processing (N = 5; Table 7)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Early non-social behavioural indicators of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD: a systematic review

Canu

Paelt

Canal‐Bedia

et al. 2020

Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed at identifying early non-social behavioural indicators that predict later ASD. Likewise, we were interested in the moment in which non-social signs discriminate between children at elevated likelihood for ASD with a later diagnosis of ASD, and children at elevated likelihood for ASD with a typical developmental outcome. In addition, we intended to explore the developmental evolution of children's symptomatology over time. A systematic literature search was conducted for longitudinal studies on early non-social behavioural indicators among siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD. The following databases were searched: PUBMED, Web of Science, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EMBASE. The study identification process was conducted by two reviewers independently. Compared to siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD with a typical developmental outcome, siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD with later ASD show impairments in attention disengagement, in gross and fine motor development and characteristic restricted and repetitive interests and behaviours, starting at 12 months of age. Moreover, early attention disengagement exerts a predictive role towards a later ASD diagnosis, given that from 12 months siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD who will receive an independent ASD diagnosis towards 24-36 months present marked difficulties in disengaging in comparison with siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD that will not satisfy the criteria for an ASD diagnosis. The findings call for a more comprehensive vision on early indicators of ASD. Further research is needed to extend results to other behavioural domains.

show abstract

A longitudinal study of parent‐reported sensory responsiveness in toddlers at‐risk for autism

Cited by 59 publications

References 60 publications

Altered brain-wide auditory networks in a zebrafish model of fragile X syndrome

Altered brain-wide auditory networks in a zebrafish model of fragile X syndrome

Construct validity of the First-Year Inventory (FYI Version 2.0) in 12-month-olds at high-risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder

Early non-social behavioural indicators of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in siblings at elevated likelihood for ASD: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About