Archive for the 'Autism' Category

Toilet training Webinar

My colleague, Annie McLaughlin, who is the Outreach Supervisor for the Virginia Institute of Autism (VIA), will be hosting a Webinar on toilet training 15 May 2012. Annie—who completed teacher education work at the University of Virginia’s Curry School and Ph.D. studies at the University of Washington and has doctoral-level certification from the Behavior Analyst Certification Board—told me that the focus won’t be on rapid toilet training a la Azrin and Foxx, but more on a data-based, schedule training that increases the likelihood that the individual will learn that the toilet is the stimulus for voiding.

Dr. Annie McLaughlin will lead an online, interactive parenting workshop on toilet training individuals of all ages with Autism Spectrum Disorders and other related disabilities. Learn how to recognize if your child is ready for toilet training, design a toilet training plan for your child, and learn practical tips for overcoming common problems. Cost $65. Limit space. After registering, participants will receive instructions on how to view the online lecture and live chat.

Registration for the Webinar is available on the Web as is a contact for additional information. Here’s a link to an antique post about toilet training

Sphere: Related Content

De novo mutations and Autism redux

In articles published online by Nature, Professors Stephan Sanders and colleagues and Brian J. O’Roak his colleagues reported additional evidence that rare mutations contribute to risk for Autism. By analyzing genetic material from parents who had children with Autism, the researchers were able to focus on differences in specific genes, what changed from one generation to the next. One team, working in the research lab of Professor Matthew State at Yale University, found strikingly unusual matches for a specific mutation at SCN2A. The other team, under the direction of Professor Evan Eichler at the University of Washington, found several candidates (including SCN1A) and a strong (4 to 1) relationship for older fathers.
Continue reading ‘De novo mutations and Autism redux’

Sphere: Related Content

Infant eye gaze predicts ASD

When they look at models who are looking toward them versus away from them, the variation in brain activity in infants who later develop Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) is different than that of their peers who do not develop ASD, according to Mayada Elsabbagh and colleagues in a study published in Current Biology. Infants who do not later develop ASD apparently are already tuning into whether human-like models are looking at them, but those who develop ASDs are doing so to a lesser degree.

Professor Elsabbagh studied 104 children, about half of whom were classified as at risk for ASD because they had an older sibling who had an ASD. They initially tested them at six months of age and, later, broke them into four groups: (a) A control group, (b) children who were at-risk but had not developed ASD by age three, (c) children who were at-risk and developed ASD symptoms by age three, and (d) children who were at-risk and developed ASD early.

detail from Elsbbagh et al. graph

At 6 to 10 months of age, the brain activity of the infants in the control group and the at-risk-without-ASD group already showed sensitivity to whether a model was looking toward or away from the children. However, the brain activity of infants who later developed ASD showed less sensitivity. The accompanying graph illustrates the results on one of their measures. (Note that the measure shown in the figure here is not the one of greatest interest to the researchers.)

Even though it is difficult to find overt behavioral markers of ASD during the first year of life, these findings support the idea that there are brain function measures that can discriminate between groups of infants at risk for ASD. It’s important to note that these data are at the group level. They can’t be taken at the individual level, so the data are not ready for diagnostic purposes.

The researchers included a group from the collaborative network supporting research with infants at risk for autism in the UK, the British Autism Study of Infant Siblings (BASIS). This group and comparable groups elsewhere are wonderful partners for research and deserve great credit for the collaboration in efforts such as this.

Here is the abstract from the article:

Autism spectrum disorders (henceforth autism) are diagnosed in around 1% of the population [1]. Familial liability confers risk for a broad spectrum of difficulties including the broader autism phenotype (BAP) [ [2] and [3]]. There are currently no reliable predictors of autism in infancy, but characteristic behaviors emerge during the second year, enabling diagnosis after this age [ [4] and [5]]. Because indicators of brain functioning may be sensitive predictors, and atypical eye contact is characteristic of the syndrome [ [6], [7], [8] and [9]] and the BAP [ [10] and [11]], we examined whether neural sensitivity to eye gaze during infancy is associated with later autism outcomes [ [12] and [13]]. We undertook a prospective longitudinal study of infants with and without familial risk for autism. At 6–10 months, we recorded infants’ event-related potentials (ERPs) in response to viewing faces with eye gaze directed toward versus away from the infant [14]. Longitudinal analyses showed that characteristics of ERP components evoked in response to dynamic eye gaze shifts during infancy were associated with autism diagnosed at 36 months. ERP responses to eye gaze may help characterize developmental processes that lead to later emerging autism. Findings also elucidate the mechanisms driving the development of the social brain in infancy.

Elsabbagh, M., Mercure1, E., Hudry, K., Chandler, S., Pasco, G., Charman, T.,…the BASIS Team. (2012). Infant neural sensitivity to dynamic eye gaze is associated with later emerging autism. Current Biology. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2011.12.056

Sphere: Related Content

“Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism” released

The authors of the blog, Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism (TPGA), announced the release of the book under the same title 19 December 2011. From what I can garner by reviewing the list of contributors provided on the blog (I’ve not had a chance to review the book), the collected essays in TPGA will be informative, honest, and evidence-based observations and commentaries written in clear and heartfelt language. It’s a strong enough entry that Steve Silberman, who has the NeuroTribes blog for the PLoSBLOGs (Public Library of Sciences), called it the book of the year.

The editors’ names—Shannon Des Roches Rosa, Jennifer Byde Myers, Liz Ditz, Emily Willingham, and Carol Greenburg—will be familiar to many readers, as I have mentioned their work and they have left comments here on EBDBlog or on sibling projects. They harvested what they considered to be top-notch material about Autism from around the Internet (the list of contributors includes many familiar names), and organized it into this collection so that people searching for the good stuff would have a lot of it in one place.

That’s the point that captured Mr. Silverman’s attention. After setting the stage by providing a capsule history of many of the mistaken paths and some of the productive steps that Autism has taken, in “Book of the Year: Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism,” he points to TPGA and writes,

With this sea-change in mind, my favorite book of the year on autism was curated and self-published by a group of parent-warriors with the express purpose of sparing other parents the grief, isolation, and confusion that followed their own kids’ diagnoses. Called the Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism, it offers helpful, positive, pragmatic, evidence-based advice for making the life of your kid and your family more rewarding and more joyful, starting today. I can’t think of a better holiday gift for someone with a loved one on the spectrum. With current estimates of autism prevalence running at 1 in 110 people in the US, the book deserves a wide readership.

Mr. Silverman’s extensive review echoes much of what the editors wrote about their book. On release of the book, they blogged:

For all today’s smiles and pride, the truth is Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism’s inspiration was our persistent frustration with the negative autism stereotypes and misinformation we faced in parenting our children with autism, or advocating with/amplifying the signal of the amazing Autistic communities. As stated in our Mission, this book is the resource we wish we’d had when autism first became part of our lives: a one-stop source for carefully curated, evidence-based information from autism parents, autistics, and autism professionals.

You can read the complete content of that entry on their blog. Also, here’s a link to the press page about the book and, if you’re already convinced, here’s a link for those who’re looking to go directly to Amazon.

Given the relationship I noted between the editors and me, as minor as it may be, I should also explain that there is no financial relationship among us. I’m not being paid to shill for the book.

Sphere: Related Content

Important newspaper coverage of Autism

Beginning 11 December 2011, journalist Alan Zarembo (with the help of Doug Smith and Sandra Poindexter) of the Los Angeles Times began presenting what could turn out to be a landmark series of articles about Autism. In the first of four installments (which runs over ~3800 words), Mr. Zarembo introduces several cases and many important—and controversial—ideas about diagnosis and prevalence of Autism. Subsequent segments cover other important topics.

The four parts of the series are as follows:

  1. An epidemic of disease or of discovery? (11 December 2011)
  2. Services go to those who fight hardest (13 December 2011)
  3. Families chase the dream of recovery (15 December 2011)
  4. Finding traces of autism in earlier eras (17 December 2011)

In addition to the extensive report, there are multiple multimedia and other sidebar supplements. This promises to be an event worth following. I encourage readers to start with the first installment in the series and follow it from there.

Links updated 17 December 2011.

Sphere: Related Content

Gaining perspective

Are you up to speed with the views of self-advocates in the Autism community? If not, you can get a good start—maybe even the beginning of a crash course—by reading a post by Zoe (over Shannon Des Roches Rosa’s name, which alert readers will recognize) over on Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism. In “The Self-Advocate/Parent Dialogues, Day One: Zoe,” Zoe represent concerns about having others speak for people with Autism. As one can infer from the title, it’s the first installment in a series of posts, so y’all can check back for more later. You might even want to watch it unfold, and check the comments as they accrete. Should be interesting.

Sphere: Related Content

Denny Reid in C’ville!

Dennis Reid, a renowned researcher and clinician who for more than 35 years has worked with individuals who have Autism, will speak on 22 September 2011 on “Evidence-Based Strategies for Promoting Enjoyment among People with Autism” in Charlottesville (VA, US). The talk by Mr. Reid, which is free and open to the public (but registration is required), is part of the Virginia Institute of Autism (VIA) Autism Speaker Series and is sponsored by VIA and the University of Virginia Children’s Hospital. It is scheduled for 5:30-6:30 at St. Anne’s-Belfield Greenway Rise Campus, Randolph Hall Auditorium. To register, go to VIA’s Web site viaschool.org or call (434) 923-8252.

For those who are unfamiliar with Mr. Reid’s research, he has an extensive record of work in behavior analysis, having published repeatedly in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. He’s based at the Carolina Behavior Analysis and Support Center in Mogantown (NC, US) which, oddly, doesn’t seem to have a Web site.

Sphere: Related Content

Little sibs of children with ASD have greater risk of Autism

In Pediatrics Professor Sally Ozonoff and her colleagues of the Baby Siblings Research Consortium have reported data indicating a substantially higher risk for Autism among siblings than had been previously found. Based on data from studies in the 1980s, estimates of the risk of Autism in a child given that an older sibling had Autism were in the range of 3 to 5%, the Consortium found that the risk may be as great as four times higher than that, perhaps as high as 20%.

The researchers in the Consortium used very careful methods in which they found 664 later-born, biological siblings of a child with Autism when that younger sibling was, on average, about 8 months old. They followed the development of the siblings and assessed whether they had the symptoms of Autism when they were 36 months old. They found almost 19% had scores above the cut-off for Autism. The risk for Autism was even greater for boys and when more than one older sibling had Autism.
Continue reading ‘Little sibs of children with ASD have greater risk of Autism’

Sphere: Related Content

ASAT newsletter pending

Do you want to know more about evidence-based interventions for Autism? Are you weary of wading through a lot of over-hyped-and-not-well-tested methods hoping to find one gem? Do you come back to EBD Blog because you pine for trustworthy news about Autism?

There is an alternative, another source: The Association for Science in Autism Treatment has a regular newsletter and a new one is about to be released. If readers hustle their bustles, they can register in time to receive the next issue which includes (according to a mailer I received)

  • A feature article in which Dr. Thomas Zane discusses the adoption of Fad Treatments in Autism.
  • Four research article summaries (ranging from treatment comparisons to prevalence of adults with autism).
  • Spotlight on a new organization Advancing Futures for Adults with Autism.
  • Two Clinical Corners (Food Selectivity and Help with the Dentist).
  • Consumer Corner (Review of Transition Resources for Adolescents and Adults with Autism).
  • An in-depth group interview about fostering positive portrayals of science-based treatment in the media.

…and for the rest, you’re just going to have to read to find out!

Here’s a link to register for the newsletter: http://www.asatonline.org/signup. I encourage folks to do.

And, if you ever forget how to find ASAT, you don’t have to poke around looking for this message. Just check over there in the siderail. You’ll find it listed in the “Web Resources.”

Sphere: Related Content

Research participation opportunities

In an accompanying PDF I have listed studies that are currently seeking children (both female and male) with Emotional of Behavioral Disorders (especially autism spectrum disorders) as participants (some include adults, as well) that are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, a service of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). The studies have diverse purposes: They may be observing different events (whether overt behavior or neurochemical activity) or they may be testing different therapies (ranging from behavioral to medical methods). Many are sponsored at least in part by the NIH, but some have funding from universities or even private industries. Because of its affiliation with NIH, ClincialTrials.gov is more likely to represent medically oriented studies and studies that use rigorous scientific methods (i.e., randomized clinical trials or RCTs), but this is not exclusively the case. Readers should examine the studies carefully.

The list is not exhaustive (I used “autism” in the search, so there are many more studies that could be located by using other terms), and I’ve provided only some of the data about each study in the table, but you can learn a fair bit about individual studies. For example, one can learn about study number NCT00198107 that is entitled “Evaluating the Effectiveness of Aripiprazole and D-Cycloserine to Treat Symptoms Associated With Autism.” It focuses on individuals with Autistic Disorders and examines an intervention (in this case, comparing drugs called Aripiprazole D-cycloserine to placebo in a randomized design with double-blind (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor) | Primary Purpose: procedures. The study began 1-Sep-05 and will end 1-Sep-11 (making it odd that it is still listed as open, no?).

To locate additional information about a particular study, copy the NCT ID number, go to ClinicalTrials.gov, and enter that number into the search box. Download the PDF here (10 pages).

Sphere: Related Content

Is environment > genetics in cause of Autism?

New research by Joachim F. Hallmayer and colleagues released on 4 July 2011 raises questions about how strong a role genetic factors play in causing Autism. A large and careful twin study by Professor Hallmayer’s Stanford University team conducted with the support of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that other factors known as the “shared environment” also influence susceptibility to Autism to a greater degree than previous research had indicated.

In genetics research, outcomes such as Autism can be caused by (a) genes, (b) shared environmental factors, (c) non-shared environmental factors, and (d) various interactions among these first three factors. (Technically, there is also “error,” a factor which is included to allow for some slippage is the relationships among these four.) Genes, of course, can be the same or different; in monozygotic or dizygotic twins they are all the same or 50% the same, respectively. The shared environment for monozygotic twins begins in the womb where they share the same placenta. After they are born, monozygotic twins are more likely to have more shared experiences (e.g., they are more likely to be dressed in matching outfits) than dizygotic twins, so they have a slightly greater shared environment than their dizygotic peer. Non-shared environments are the unique experiences people have; for twins, this factor is pretty minor, and it carries little power or weight. But, back to the chase….

In contrast, for example, to a famous study by A. Bailey and colleagues from 1995 that showed a very high heritability for Autism (92% of monozygotic twins were concordant for Autism but only 10% of dizygotic twins were concordant), the present study found that genetic heritability accounted for only 37% of the variance in Autism and shared environment factors accounted for 55% of Autism disorders. The findings hold whether Autism is diagnosed more strictly or more broadly; when Professor Hallmayer’s team examined Autism Spectrum Disorder cases rather than more narrowly defined cases, the percentages went up to 38% genetic and 58% shared environment contributions.
Continue reading ‘Is environment > genetics in cause of Autism?’

Sphere: Related Content

FC goes to MIT

According to Robert T. Carroll at the Skeptic’s Dictionary, several people associated with facilitated communication have been working with Professor Rosalind W. Picard of the Affective Computing research group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Lab. In “Facilitated Communication Infiltrates MIT’s Media Lab,” Mr. Carroll reports about Professor Picard’s connections with supporters of what he says is now called “supported typing.”

Why would MIT’s Media Lab be involved with something that is clearly a discredited pseudoscience?

MIT’s Media Lab’s involvement with FC goes back several years.

A private FC conference occurred in May 2008 involving Douglas Biklen, Head of the FC Institute, Rosalind Picard, Head of the MIT Affective Computing Group, Margaret Bauman of the Massachusetts General Ladders Program (a long time FC advocate; she tried to get the New England Center to use FC in the early 1990s; she just got $29 Million from Nancy Lurie Marks a major, major FC supporter), Martha Herbert of Harvard Medical (supports the view that autism is a movement disorder, justifying FC)…That meeting seems to have been designed to establish liaisons between FC advocates in the Media Lab, the Ladders Program at Massachusetts General, the Syracuse FC Institute [now the Institute on Communication and Inclusion], and the University of Buenos Aires (i.e., Daniel Orlievsky), and cannot be unconnected to this upcoming event in July.

Mr. Carroll has much more on this. Given the problems with FC, one must wonder what a prestigious institution such as MIT would gain from such a connection. Is it possible that the researchers are legitimately investigating FC?

What about other developments from this lab? How valuable are they? One can’t dismiss them simply by association. Does this bracelet that seems to capture galvanic skin response and feed it wirelessly to computers actually have much value? Tracking GSR across time does look interesting to me. What clinical applications might emerge? Will they be beneficial?

You can read Facilitated Communication Infiltrates MIT’s Media Lab in its entirety on the Skeptic’s Dictionary.

Sphere: Related Content




Bad Behavior has blocked 812 access attempts in the last 7 days.