Cited by 70Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesBehavioral and Psychological Studies

Variability in Autism Symptom Trajectories Using Repeated Observations From 14 to 36 Months of Age

Open access
Kim, So Hyun, Bal, Vanessa H., Benrey, Nurit, Choi, Yeo Bi, Guthrie, Whitney, Colombi, Costanza, Lord, Catherine·2018·Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective This study examined variability in autism symptom trajectories in toddlers referred for possible autism spectrum disorder (ASD) who had frequent observations from 14 to 36 months of age. Method In total, 912 observations of the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS) were obtained from 149 children (103 with ASD) followed from 14 to 36 months of age. As a follow-up to a previous analysis of ADOS algorithm scores, a different analytic approach (Proc Traj) was implemented to identify several courses of symptom trajectories using ADOS Calibrated Severity Scores in a larger sample. Proc Traj is a statistical method that clusters individuals into separate groups based on different growth trajectories. Changes in symptom severity based on individual ADOS items also were examined. Results Trajectory analysis of overall symptom severity identified 4 clusters (non-spectrum ~25%; worsening ~27%; moderately-improving ~25%; severe-persistent ~23%). Trajectory clusters varied significantly in the proportions of confirmatory ASD diagnosis, level of baseline and final verbal and nonverbal abilities, and symptom severity. For the moderately-improving group, social communication improved, whereas restricted and repetitive behaviors were stable over time. Language and verbal and nonverbal communication improved for many children, but several social affect and restricted and repetitive behavior symptoms remained stable or worsened. Conclusion Significant variability in symptom trajectories was observed among toddlers referred for possible ASD. Changes in social and restricted and repetitive behavior domain scores did not always co-occur. Similarly, item-level trajectories did not always align with trajectories of overall severity scores. These findings highlight the importance of monitoring individual symptoms within broader symptom domains when conducting repeated assessments for young children with suspected ASD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.05.026

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ADOS-2 calibrated severity scores and SRS-2 T-scores have been useful tools for measuring the degree of social communication impairments and repetitive behavior patterns.

    “The ADOS-2’s calibrated severity scores (CSS) and the SRS-2’s T-scores have been useful tools for measuring the degree of social communication impairments and repetitive behavior patterns (Kim et al. 2018; Wiggins et al. 2019).”

    From The Diagnosis of Autism: From Kanner to DSM-III to DSM-5 and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as Kim et al. 2018

    The Measures section (page not provided) says ADOS calibrated severity scores quantify overall symptom severity and the Social Affect and Restricted and Repetitive Behaviors domains. That supports the ADOS portion of the claim, but our copy does not mention SRS-2 or its T-scores (searched: “SRS-2” and “Social Responsiveness Scale T score”). (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Dimensional measures can provide information about phenotypic profiles in autism, both related to autism symptoms and non-autism related symptoms, that can contribute to improved treatment planning and better symptom tracking over time.

    “Dimensional measures such as these can provide information about the phenotypic profiles in autism, both related to autism symptoms as well as non-autism related symptoms, that can contribute to improved treatment planning and better symptom tracking over time (Gotham et al. 2009; Kim et al. 2018).”

    From The Diagnosis of Autism: From Kanner to DSM-III to DSM-5 and Beyond (2021) · cites this paper as Kim et al. 2018

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says that tracking individual autism symptoms alongside developmental and communication skills can inform monitoring and assessment of treatment response. It also notes diagnostic and treatment implications. The paper does not establish the broader claim that dimensional profiles of non-autism-related symptoms improve treatment planning. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Several studies have evaluated the performance of parent-report instruments between 14 and 24 months of age, such as the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (M-CHAT) and the Early Screening of Autistic Traits (ESAT).

    “The potential for early testing to prospectively identify children with ASD at a young age has considerable interest, and several studies have evaluated the performance of parent-report instruments between 14 and 24 months of age, such as the”

    From Autism spectrum disorder (2020) · cites this paper as [143]

    The Measures section describes clinician-administered ADOS assessments and parent-reported information used in diagnosis, but does not discuss studies evaluating the performance of parent-report screening instruments. Searches for M-CHAT, ESAT, and parent-report screening between 14 and 24 months found no passage addressing the attributed claim. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, S. H., Bal, V. H., Benrey, N., Choi, Y. B., Guthrie, W., Colombi, C., & Lord, C.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Kim, So Hyun
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
57
Issue
11
Pages
837-848.e2
ISSN
0890-8567 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2892185794
Cited by
70
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
5.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2019-05-01)
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Rutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH066496)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
autism spectrum disorder, symptom trajectories, toddlers, autism severity, restricted and repetitive behaviors, social communication, language development, nonverbal communication, social affect, ASD diagnosis
MeSH terms
Autistic Disorder, Child, Preschool, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Severity of Illness Index

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review