Search

This study examined the feasibility of implementing the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers, an interactive Level-2 screen for autism spectrum disorder, within Part C Early Intervention settings. Participants included 69 Early Intervention providers ( M age = 43.3 years, 93.7% females, 92.4% Whites) from nine programs who attended a one-day Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers training workshop. Half of the providers reported using the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers, and reported it to be feasible and effective. Regardless of Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers use, providers reported increased knowledge about recognizing the early signs of autism spectrum disorder following the workshop. Provider-reported self-efficacy regarding skills related to autism spectrum disorder screening increased significantly from baseline to the 18-month follow-up. Providers also described the facilitators (e.g. promotes communication with families) and barriers (e.g. certification process), that influenced their adoption. Results highlight the potential use of the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers within Early Intervention settings to identify autism spectrum disorder, and suggest an implementation model in which specific providers serve as a screening “point-person,” rather than expecting it to be used by all providers. Future research should aim to identify characteristics of agencies or providers that might facilitate Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers use, as well as specific implementation plans and strategies that might promote long-term sustainability of Level-2 screening practices. This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov before the time of the first study enrollee. Registration number: NCT02409303; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02409303 Lay abstract The early detection of autism spectrum disorder can lead to access to autism spectrum disorder-specific services that have been shown to have a large impact on a child’s overall development. Although a stable diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder can be made by age 2 years, most children are not diagnosed until much later. To address this issue, this study examined the effectiveness of training Part C Early Intervention providers to use an interactive autism spectrum disorder screening tool, the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers. Sixty-nine providers attended a 1-day training workshop on the use of the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers. After the workshop, providers reported increased knowledge about recognizing the early signs of autism spectrum disorder, and about 45% of the providers reported using the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers with families in their caseloads 18 months after the training. These results suggest that the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers is feasible for use within Early Intervention settings. In addition, they suggest that specific providers might serve as a screening “point-person,” rather than expecting the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers to be used by all providers. Future research should aim to identify specific characteristics of agencies or providers that might be best suited for using the Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers.

The Screening Tool for Autism in Toddlers (STAT) is a validated stage-2 autism spectrum disorder (ASD) screening measure that takes 20 minutes to administer and comprises 12 play-based items that are scored according to specific criteria. This study examines an expanded version (STAT-E) that includes the examiner's subjective ratings of children's social engagement (SE) and atypical behaviors (AB) in the scoring algorithm. The sample comprised 238 children who were 24-35 months old. The STAT-E assessors had limited ASD experience to mimic its use by community-based non-specialists, and were trained using a scalable web-based platform. A diagnostic evaluation was completed by clinical experts who were blind to the STAT-E results. Logistic regression, ROC curves, and classification matrices and metrics were used to determine the screening properties of STAT-E when scored using the original STAT scoring algorithm versus a new algorithm that included the SE and AB ratings. Inclusion of the SE and AB ratings improved positive risk classification appreciably, while the specificity declined. These results suggest that the STAT-E using the original STAT scoring algorithm optimizes specificity, while the STAT-E scoring algorithm with the two new ratings optimizes the positive risk classification. Using multiple scoring algorithms on the STAT may provide improved screening accuracy for diverse contexts, and a scalable web-based tutorial may be a pathway for increasing the number of community providers who can administer the STAT and contribute toward increased rates of autism screening.

Defining the central components of an intervention is critical for balancing fidelity with flexible implementation in both research settings and community practice. Implementation scientists distinguish an intervention’s essential components (thought to cause clinical change) and adaptable periphery (recommended, but not necessary). While implementing core components with fidelity may be essential for effectiveness, requiring fidelity to the adaptable periphery may stifle innovation critical for personalizing care and achieving successful community implementation. No systematic method exists for defining essential components a priori. We present the CORE (COmponents & Rationales for Effectiveness) Fidelity Method—a novel method for defining key components of evidence-based interventions—and apply it to a case example of reciprocal imitation teaching, a parent-implemented social communication intervention. The CORE Fidelity Method involves three steps: (1) gathering information from published and unpublished materials; (2) synthesizing information, including empirical and hypothesized causal explanations of component effectiveness; and (3) drafting a CORE model and ensuring its ongoing use in implementation efforts. Benefits of this method include: (1) ensuring alignment between intervention and fidelity materials; (2) clarifying the scope of the adaptable periphery to optimize implementation; and (3) hypothesizing—and later, empirically validating—the intervention’s active ingredients and their associated mechanisms of change. Lay abstract Interventions that support social communication include several “components,” or parts (e.g. strategies for working with children and families, targeting specific skills). Some of these components may be essential for the intervention to work, while others may be recommended or viewed as helpful but not necessary for the intervention to work. “Recommended” components are often described as “adaptable” because they can be changed to improve fit in different settings where interventions are offered or with different individuals. We need to understand which parts of an intervention are essential (and which are adaptable) when translating interventions from research to community settings, but it is challenging to do this before studying an intervention in the community. This article presents the CORE (COmponents & Rationales for Effectiveness) Fidelity Method—a new method for defining the essential components of evidence-based interventions—and applies it to a case example of Reciprocal Imitation Teaching, an intervention that parents are taught to deliver with their young children with social communication delays. The CORE Fidelity Method involves three steps: (1) gathering information from multiple sources; (2) integrating information from previous research and theory; and (3) drafting a CORE model for ongoing use. The benefits of using the CORE Fidelity Method may include: (1) improving consistency in intervention and research materials to help all providers emphasize the most important skills or strategies; (2) clarifying which parts of the intervention can be adapted; and (3) supporting future research that evaluates which intervention components work and how they work.