Miller Meghan, Iosif Ana-Maria, Young Gregory S, Hill Monique, Phelps Hanzel Elise, Hutman Ted, Johnson Scott, Ozonoff Sally
MIND Institute, University of California, Davis.
Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis.
Autism Res. 2016 Jun;9(6):632-42. doi: 10.1002/aur.1572. Epub 2015 Oct 9.
Studies of infants at risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have proliferated, but few of these samples have been followed longer-term. We conducted a follow-up study, at age 5.5-9 years, of younger siblings of children with ASD (high-risk group, n = 79) or typical development (low-risk group, n = 60), originally recruited as infants. Children with ASD were excluded because of the focus on understanding the range of non-ASD outcomes among high-risk siblings. Using examiner ratings, parent ratings, and standardized assessments, we evaluated differences in clinical outcomes, psychopathology symptoms, autism symptoms, language skills, and nonverbal cognitive abilities. After adjusting for covariates, the high-risk group had increased odds of any clinically elevated/impaired score across measures relative to the low-risk group (43% vs. 12%, respectively). The high-risk group also had increased odds of examiner-rated Clinical Concerns (CC) outcomes (e.g., ADHD concerns, broader autism phenotype, speech-language difficulties, anxiety/mood problems, learning problems) relative to the low-risk group (38% vs. 13%, respectively). The high-risk group with CC outcomes had higher parent-reported psychopathology and autism symptoms, and lower directly-assessed language skills, than the Low-Risk Typically Developing (TD) and High-Risk TD groups, which did not differ. There were no differences in nonverbal cognitive skills. For some in the high-risk group, clinical concerns persisted from early childhood, whereas for others clinical concerns were first evident at school-age. Results suggest continued vulnerability in at least a subgroup of school-age children with a family history of ASD and suggest that this population may benefit from continued screening and monitoring into the school-age years. Autism Res 2016, 9: 632-642. © 2015 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
针对自闭症谱系障碍(ASD)风险婴儿的研究大量涌现,但其中很少有样本进行了长期跟踪。我们对最初在婴儿期招募的ASD患儿(高风险组,n = 79)或发育正常儿童(低风险组,n = 60)的弟弟妹妹进行了一项随访研究,随访时年龄为5.5至9岁。由于重点是了解高风险兄弟姐妹中ASD以外的结果范围,因此排除了患有ASD的儿童。我们使用检查者评分、家长评分和标准化评估,评估了临床结果、精神病理学症状、自闭症症状、语言技能和非语言认知能力的差异。在对协变量进行调整后,与低风险组相比,高风险组在各项测量指标上出现任何临床升高/受损分数的几率更高(分别为43%和12%)。与低风险组相比,高风险组在检查者评定的临床关注(CC)结果(如注意力缺陷多动障碍相关问题、广泛自闭症表型、言语语言困难、焦虑/情绪问题、学习问题)方面的几率也更高(分别为38%和13%)。与低风险典型发育(TD)组和高风险TD组相比,有CC结果的高风险组家长报告的精神病理学和自闭症症状更高,而直接评估的语言技能更低,后两组之间没有差异。非语言认知技能没有差异。对于高风险组中的一些人,临床关注从幼儿期就持续存在,而对于另一些人,临床关注在学龄期才首次显现。结果表明,至少有一部分有ASD家族史的学龄儿童仍然易受影响,这表明该人群可能受益于持续到学龄期的筛查和监测。《自闭症研究》2016年,9:632 - 642。© 2015国际自闭症研究协会,威利期刊公司