Autism Screen and Assessment

TARGET: Texas Guide for Effective Teaching
Autism Screenings and Assessments

Public schools are required by law to identify all children with disabilities, including those with
autism spectrum disorders (AU) (IDEA, 2004). Early identification is key because early treatment
leads to better outcomes (Dawson & Osterling, 1997; Eikeseth, Smith, Jahr, & Eldevik, 2007).
Although it is often difficult to suggest to staff and parents that a child may have an autism
spectrum disorder, there is a significant risk to failing to recognize the disorder and provide
intervention when it is present.
The process of evaluating for autism spectrum disorders is complex and cannot be reduced to a single
score from a single test. Freeman, Cronin, and Candela (2002) highlight that “rating scales were not
designed to be used in isolation to make a diagnosis. They are useful to the clinician, but are only one
source of qualitative information for a comprehensive clinical assessment” (p. 148). Accurate
identification of autism spectrum disorder requires analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data
from a number of sources. As such, a quality assessment is dependent on the clinician – the most
important component of any evaluation process.
This section discusses the importance of a thorough developmental history and reviews autism
screening and assessment tools.
Did You Know?
• Autism spectrum disorders are not rare. They are more prevalent in children “than cancer,
diabetes, spina bifida, and Down syndrome” (Filipek et al., 1999, p. 440).
• A growing body of research suggests that autism can be accurately diagnosed by age 2
(Bishop et al., 2008; Charman & Baird, 2002).
• Diagnosis of autism at age 2 is accurate and stable over time (Charman et al., 2005; Eaves &
Ho, 2004; Lord et al., 2006; Turner et al., 2006).
Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 1

Developmental History
Autism is classified as “Pervasive Developmental Disorders” by the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders-4th Edition, Text Revision (American Psychiatric Association, 2000);
therefore, accurate assessment must include a thorough developmental history.
Developmental history is best collected through an in-person interview with the child’s
parents/caregivers. Indeed, Filipek et al. (1999) stress the importance of parent/caregiver input
to the diagnostic process.
Critical areas to include in a developmental history are summarized in the listing below. Several
autism screening and assessment tools incorporate components of a developmental history
questionnaire. These are denoted with an asterisk (*) on the assessment tool table.
• Birth History
• Family History (immediate and extended)
• Pervasive Developmental Disorders
• Genetic or Medical Disorders
• Learning Disorders
• Emotional/Behavioral Disorders
• Medical History
• Medical Conditions (e.g., seizures, allergies, asthma, head injury/trauma)
• Hospitalization
• Sensory Differences
• Medication
• Hearing/Vision
• Previous Evaluations/Other Diagnoses
• Developmental Milestones
• Language/Communication
• Social
• Motor
• History of Regression or Interruption of development
• History of Interventions

Overview of Instruments
A number of tools are available for screening and diagnosis/identification of autism spectrum
disorders. This section provides an overview of such instruments and the relevant research.
Accurate screening and diagnosis/identification of autism spectrum disorders requires

collecting and assimilating data from a variety of sources using multiple methods. As with all
data, the information collected must subsequently be interpreted. Experienced clinicians never
rely strictly on a screening or diagnostic instrument. While assessment tools can provide
valuable information, no tool interprets itself.
Efforts have been made in the following to distinguish between screening and diagnostic tools.
For example, Charak and Stella (2001-2002) state that, “Screening instruments are intended to
help clinicians identify children who present with developmental delays and/or atypical
behavior for whom a diagnosis in the autistic spectrum may be considered . . . [those] who
should be referred for a more intensive diagnostic evaluation” (p. 6). The term “diagnostic”
instrument is misleading because no single instrument constitutes a sufficient basis for a
diagnostic decision. In practice, there is no distinct line where screening ends and diagnostic
assessment begins. The information gathered during screening is incorporated in the
comprehensive assessment process.
This section will provide a brief review of measures designed to capture descriptive information
from parents/caregivers, staff, and the student.
ASPERGER SYNDROME DIAGNOSTIC SCALE (ASDS)
The Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale (ASDS; Myles, Bock, & Simpson, 2001) is a norm-
referenced measure consisting of 50 yes/no items. The ASDS yields scores in five areas:
cognitive, maladaptive, language, social, and sensorimotor, as well as an Asperger Syndrome
Quotient (ASQ). The five subtests provide information comparing the behaviors of the
individual to the behaviors of individuals diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome (AS). The ASQ

indicates the probability of Asperger Syndrome. Any individual who knows the child or
adolescent well may complete the ASDS.
AUTISM BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST (ABC)
The Autism Behavior Checklist (Krug, Arick, & Almond, 2008) is a 57-item questionnaire
completed by parents or teachers. It is one component of the Autism Screening Instrument for
Educational Planning-Third Edition (Krug et al., 2008). The ABC is divided into five subscales:
sensory behavior, social relating, body and object use, language and communication skills, and
social and adaptive skills.
AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW-REVISED (ADI-R)
The Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R; Lord, Rutter, & LeCouteur, 1994) is the 1994
revision of the ADI. The interview is conducted with parents or caretakers who have knowledge
about the individual’s current behavior and developmental history. The questions address the
triad of symptoms related to autism spectrum disorders – Language/Communication;
Reciprocal Social Interactions; and Restricted, Repetitive, and Stereotyped Behaviors and
Interests. The measure consists of 93 yes/no questions followed by probe questions, which are
scored on a scale of 0 to 2. Using a scoring template, the scores are converted into diagnostic
criteria based on the International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision (ICD-10; World Health
Organization, 1993).
AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC OBSERVATION SCHEDULE (ADOS)/AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC

OBSERVATION SCHEDULE-GENERIC (ADOS-G)
The ADOS/ADOS-G (Lord, Rutter, DiLavore, & Risi, 2001) is a semi-structured, standardized
observational assessment tool designed to assess autism spectrum disorders in children,
adolescents, and adults. The ADOS-G was developed from the original ADOS (Lord et al., 1989)
and the Pre-Linguistic Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (PL-ADOS; DiLavore, Lord, &
Rutter, 1995). The ADOS-G is now commonly referred to, and marketed by the publisher, as the
“ADOS.”

The new instrument consists of four modules that cover a broader age and developmental
range. Each module consists of a variety of activities that provide the examiner with the
opportunity to observe social and communication skills associated with autism spectrum
disorders. The examiner selects a module based on the individual’s expressive language skills
and chronological age. The module takes approximately 30-45 minutes to administer.
Observations are recorded and scored by the examiner. The ADOS provides cutoff scores to aid
in interpretation.
AUTISM OBSERVATION SCALE FOR INFANTS (AOSI)
The Autism Observation Scale (AOSI; Bryson, McDermott, Rombough, Brian, & Zwaigenbaum,
2000) is a semi-structured, play-based measure designed to identify early signs of autism in
high-risk infants (those who have an older sibling with autism). The AOSI is intended for infants
6-18 months. Seven activities provide opportunities to observe behaviors in the following areas:
visual tracking, disengagement of attention, orientation to name, reciprocal social smiling,
differential response to facial emotion, social anticipation, and imitation. Currently, the AOSI is
used as a research instrument. It is unpublished and is not commercially available.
AUTISM SCREENING INSTRUMENT FOR EDUCATIONAL PLANNING-THIRD

EDITION (ASIEP-3)
The ASIEP-3 (Krug, Arick, & Almond, 2008) was developed to evaluate autism spectrum
disorders and assist in developing and monitoring educational programs for individuals on the
spectrum. The ASIEP-3 consists of the following five standardized subtests:
• Autism Behavior Checklist: A questionnaire that is designed to assess characteristics of

autism
• Sample of Vocal Behavior: An assessment of spontaneous expressive language
• Interaction Assessment: Measurement of a child’s social responses and reaction to requests
• Educational Assessment: Assessment of educational skills, including remaining in seat,
receptive/expressive language, body concept, and imitation of speech

• Prognosis of Learning Rate: Measures rate of learning
AUTISM-SPECTRUM QUOTIENT (AQ)
The AQ is a parent questionnaire designed to identify the presence of the characteristics of

autism spectrum disorders. There are currently two versions of the Autism-Spectrum Quotient
– the school-age adolescent version (AQ-Adol; Baron-Cohen, Hoekstra, Knickmeyer, &
Wheelwright, 2006) and the children’s version (AQ-Child; Auyeung, Baron-Cohen, Wheelwright,
& Allison, 2008). The AQ contains 50 items that describe five areas associated with autism
spectrum disorders: social skills, attention switching, attention to detail, communication, and
imagination. Parents rate each item on a range from “definitely agree” to “definitely disagree.”
AUTISM SPECTRUM SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE (ASSQ)
The Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ; Ehlers, Gillberg, & Wing, 1999) is
designed to screen for symptoms related to AS and other high-functioning disorders (HFA)
along the autism spectrum. The checklist consists of 27 items that are rated on a 3-point scale.
The scale has been studied with individuals between the age of 6 and 17. Estimated cutoff
scores are provided.
CHECKLIST FOR AUTISM IN TODDLERS (CHAT)
The Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (CHAT; Baron-Cohen, Allen, & Gillberg, 1992; Baron-Cohen
et al., 1996) is a brief screening questionnaire that is completed by parents and a physician
during the child’s 18-month check-up. Five key items are indicative of the risk of developing
autism: pretend play, protodeclarative pointing (expressing interest), following a point,
pretending, and producing a point. If a child fails the initial administration of the CHAT, it is
recommended that the questionnaire be readministered one month later. Any child who fails a
second time should be referred for formal autism assessment.

CHILDHOOD ASPERGER SYNDROME TEST (CAST)
The Childhood Asperger Syndrome Test (CAST; Scott, Baron-Cohen, Bolton, & Brayne, 2002) is a
parent questionnaire designed to screen for Asperger Syndrome and other social and
communication disorders. The test consists of a 37-item yes/no parent questionnaire and was
designed for children 4 to 11 years old.
CHILDHOOD AUTISM RATING SCALE (CARS)
The purpose of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS; Schopler, Reichler, & Renner, 1988) is
to identify the presence of autism in children. Fifteen domains are rated on a 7-point Likert
scale (assigned values range from 1 to 4 – 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4): Relating to people; Imitative
behavior; Emotional response; Body use; Object use; Adaptation to change; Visual response;
Listening response; Perceptive response; Fear and anxiety; Verbal communication; Nonverbal
communication; Activity level; Level and consistency of intellective relations; and General
impressions. Ratings from within normal limits to severely abnormal are based on observation,
parent interview, and other records. The Total Score, generated from the 15 domains, provides
a rating in one of three categories – nonautistic, mild to moderately autistic, or severely
autistic.
DEVELOPMENTAL BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST-AUTISM SCREENING ALGORITHM

(DBC-ASA)
The Development Behavior Checklist-Autism School Algorithm (DBC-ASA; Brereton, Tonge,

Mackinnon, & Einfeld, 2002) is an autism screening instrument derived from the Developmental
Checklist Parent/Primary caregiver report (DBC-P). The DBC-ASA is comprised of 29 items from
the original checklist and is intended for children and adolescents 4 to 18 years old.

DEVELOPMENTAL CHECKLIST-EARLY SCREEN (DBC-ES)
The Developmental Checklist-Early Screen (DBC-ES; Gray & Tonge, 2005) is an autism screening
instrument derived from the Developmental Checklist Parent/Primary caregiver report (DBC-P).
The DBC-ES is comprised of 17 items from the original checklist and is intended for children 18
to 48 months.
DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW FOR SOCIAL AND COMMUNICATION DISORDERS

(DISCO)
The Diagnostic Interview for Social and Communication Disorders (DISCO; Wing, Leekam, Libby,
Gould, & Larcombe, 2002) is an assessment tool for the diagnosis of Autistic Disorder,
Asperger’s Disorder, psychiatric disorders, and other developmental disabilities. The DISCO also
assists in intervention planning. The DISCO is intended to be used as part of a multidisciplinary
assessment battery. Parents or other caregivers participate in an interview that takes
approximately three hours. The interviewer rates items based on the informant’s responses.
EARLY SCREENING OF AUTISTIC TRAITS (ESAT)
The Early Screening of Autistic Traits (ESAT; Swinkels et al., 2006) is a 14-item screening
checklist for parents/caregivers. The questionnaire is designed for 14-month-old infants. The
tool is designed to be administered by health practitioners at well-baby visits. Failure on three
or more items suggests the need for a diagnostic evaluation.
GILLIAM ASPERGER’S DISORDER SCALE (GADS)
The Gilliam Asperger’s Disorder Scale (GADS; Gilliam, 2003) is a 32-item questionnaire designed
to identify individuals with Asperger’s Disorder. The tool is comprised of the following
subscales: Social Interaction, Restricted Patterns, Cognitive Patterns, and Pragmatic Skills. The
GADS can be completed by parents/caregivers or teachers. Respondents indicate the frequency
of behaviors from “never observed” to “frequently observed.” The GADS includes a parent
interview form that inquires about language and cognitive development, self-help skills,

adaptive behavior, and curiosity. There is also a section of “key questions” for
parents/caregivers to complete.
GILLIAM AUTISM RATING SCALE-SECOND EDITION (GARS-2)
The Gilliam Autism Rating Scale-2 (GARS-2; Gilliam, 2006) is designed for screening and
diagnosis of autism in individuals aged 3 to 22. It was normed on a sample of 1,107 individuals
from 48 states in the United States. The GARS-2 can be completed by parents, teachers, or
other caregivers who are with the individual regularly. The GARS-2 consists of three subscales:
Stereotyped Behaviors, Communication, and Social Interaction. The 42 items are rated based
on frequency and can be completed in 5 to 10 minutes. The GARS-2 also includes a parent
interview and questions to consider during diagnostic decision-making.
KRUG ASPERGER’S DISORDER INDEX (KADI)
The Krug Asperger’s Disorder Index (KADI; Krug & Arick, 2003) is a screening instrument for
Asperger Syndrome. It is also a useful tool for developing goals for intervention. Two forms,
elementary (6-12 years) and secondary (12-21 years), cover a wide age range. The KADI is
divided into two sections. Section 1 is a pre-screening tool. Section 2 consists of additional
items, which are completed only if results of the screening tool indicate need for further
assessment.
MODIFIED CHECKLIST FOR AUTISM IN TODDLERS (MCHAT)
The Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddles (MCHAT; Robbins, Fein, Barton, & Green, 2001) is
a 23-item yes/no questionnaire for parents and caregivers. It is designed to screen for autism in
infants 16 to 30 months. The MCHAT was based on the CHAT (Baron-Cohen, Allen, & Gillberg,
1992; Baron-Cohen et al., 1996); however, it does not include items that require
observation/administration by a physician. The authors of the MCHAT indicate that the
instrument purposefully yields more false-positives. A follow-up questionnaire helps screen
those who require further evaluation.

MONTEIRO INTERVIEW GUIDELINES FOR DIAGNOSING ASPERGER’S

SYNDROME (MIGDAS)
The Monteiro Interview Guidelines for Diagnosing Asperger’s Syndrome (MIGDAS; Monteiro,
2008) is a qualitative assessment tool designed for use by school-based evaluation teams to
assess Asperger Syndrome in children and adolescents. The MIGDAS consists of three tools:
Pre-Interview Checklist, Parent and Teacher Interview, and Diagnostic Student Interview.
Together, these tools help teams to gather qualitative information to assist in the diagnostic
process. Teams first complete the Pre-Interview Checklist, a brief yes/no questionnaire, to help
determine the need for an evaluation. The remaining interviews (teacher, parent, and student)
are completed only when a need has been identified. After completion of the evaluation, teams
discuss their qualitative observations and interpret the results.
PERVASIVE DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS SCREENING TEST-SECOND EDITION

(PDDST-II)
The Pervasive Developmental Disorders Screening Test-Second Edition (PDDST-II; Siegel, 2004)
is a questionnaire designed to screen for autism in young children from 12 to 48 months. Three
versions were developed for different settings, referred to as stages: Stage 1: Primary Care
Screener; Stage 2: Developmental Clinic Screener; and Stage 3: Autism Clinic Severity Screener.
Stage 1 is intended for primary care settings. Stage 2 is intended for children who are receiving
developmental services, and Stage 3 is designed to help differentiate autism from other
pervasive developmental disorders. The PDDST-II may be administered to parents/caregivers as
a questionnaire or given in an interview format. Results are interpreted by a clinician.
SOCIAL COMMUNICATION QUESTIONNAIRE (SCQ)
The Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ; Rutter, Bailey, Lord, & Berument, 2003) is an
instrument for screening for autism in individuals over the age of 4 with a mental age over 2
years. The SCQ contains 40 yes/no items, which can be completed in less than 10 minutes by a
parent or other caregiver. The SCQ has two forms – the Lifetime Form, which focuses on
behavior throughout development, and the Current Form, which focuses on behavior during

the most recent three months. The instrument yields a Total Score for comparison to defined
cutoff points.
SOCIAL RESPONSIVENESS SCALE (SRS)
The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS; Constantino & Gruber, 2005) is a 65-item questionnaire
used to assist in screening and diagnosis of autism. The tool can be completed by
parents/caregivers or teachers who are familiar with the student. Questions are rated on a 4-
point Likert scale. The test provides an overall score and five treatment subscales that can be
used for program planning: Social Awareness, Social Cognition, Social Communication, Social
Motivation, and Autistic Mannerisms.
SCREENING TOOL FOR AUTISM IN TWO-YEAR-OLDS (STAT)
The Screening Tool for Autism in Two-Year-Olds (STAT; Stone, Coonrod, & Ousley, 2000) is an
instrument for screening for autism in children between the ages of 24 and 36 months. This
instrument consists of 12 interactive activities administered within the context of play.
Behaviors in four social-communicative domains – play, motor imitation, requesting and
directing attention – are assessed, and performance on each item is rated as Pass, Fail, or
Refuse, based on specified criteria. The STAT may be given by a wide range of professionals, but
training in administration and scoring is required. Administration time is approximately 20
minutes.
SOCIAL COMMUNICATION QUESTIONNAIRE (SCQ)
The Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ; Rutter, Bailey, Lord, & Berument, 2003) is an
instrument for screening for autism in individuals over the age of 4 with a mental age over 2
years. The SCQ contains 40 yes/no items, which can be completed in less than 10 minutes by a
parent or other caregiver. The SCQ has two forms – the Lifetime Form, which focuses on
behavior throughout development, and the Current Form, which focuses on behavior during
the most recent three months. The instrument yields a Total Score for comparison to defined
cutoff points.

SOCIAL RESPONSIVENESS SCALE (SRS)
The Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS; Constantino & Gruber, 2005) is a 65-item questionnaire
used to assist in screening and diagnosis of autism. The tool can be completed by
parents/caregivers or teachers who are familiar with the student. Questions are rated on a 4-
point Likert scale. The test provides an overall score and five treatment subscales that can be
used for program planning: Social Awareness, Social Cognition, Social Communication, Social
Motivation, and Autistic Mannerisms.

Autism Spectrum Screening and Diagnostic/Identification Tools

Autism screening and diagnostic/identification tools are summarized in the following table. This
list includes the best known and most widely used instruments available. Charak and Stella
(2001-2002) identified seven instruments as screeners (ABC, ASIEP, CHAT, PDDST, STAT, ASQ,
and the SCQ) and four instruments as diagnostic (ADOS, CARS, GARS, and the ASDS).
The current versions of these tools are identified accordingly in the Screening/Diagnostic
column in the table. Instruments not included in Charak and Stella’s selective review are
identified as screening or diagnostic based on the authors’ description. Several autism
screening and diagnostic/identification tools incorporate components of a developmental
history questionnaire. These are denoted with an asterisk (*).
Note: All summary and research tables in the remainder of this section are from Grossman, B.
G., Aspy, R., & Myles, B. S. (2009). Interdisciplinary evaluation of autism spectrum disorders:
From diagnosis through program planning. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger Publishing
Company. Used with permission.

Summary of Screening and Diagnostic/Identification Tools
Name of Tool Screening/ Age Range Method of Approx. Subscales Availability

and Author Diagnosis (in years Administration/Format Time to
except Administer
where
noted)
*Asperger D 5-18 Parent/teacher/caregiver 10-15 min. Cognitive
http://www.pearsonassessments.com/HAIWEB/Cultures/
Syndrome questionnaire Maladaptive
Diagnostic 50 items rated for presence Language
en-us/Productdetail.htm?Pid=076-1618-
Scale (ASDS) or absence of behaviors Social
Myles, Bock, related to Asperger Sensorimotor
& Simpson Syndrome
384&Mode=summary
(2001) Yields standard scores and
percentiles for the five
subscales. Raw scores from
Pearson
the subscales are summed
to create the Asperger
Syndrome Quotient (ASQ),
which is a standard score.
The ASQ indicates the
probability of the diagnosis
of AS based on scores of a
normative sample of
individuals diagnosed with
AS.
Autism S 3 to 14 Subtest of the ASIEP-3 10-20 min. Sensory behavior
http://www.proedinc.com/custo
Behavior A 57-item questionnaire; Social relating
Checklist yes/no format Body and object use
mer/default.aspx
(ABC) Parent or teacher may Language and
Krug, Arick, & complete communication skills
Pro-Ed
Almond Yields cutoff score ranges Social and adaptive
(2008) based on different skills
diagnoses
Autism D Over 2 Structured interview 1.5-2.5 hrs. Early development

_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
ortal/page?_pageid=53,53086&
http://portal.wpspublish.com/p
Western Psychological Services
Diagnostic 93 items in three functional Language and

Interview- domains communication
Revised (ADI- Responses are coded in Reciprocal social
R)** eight content areas interactions
Lord, Rutter, Yields algorithm cutoff Restricted, repetitive,
& LeCouteur scores and stereotyped
(1994) behaviors and
interests


except Administer
where
noted)
Autism D 2-adult Clinician administers to 30-45 min. Communication
http://portal.wpspublish.com/por
tal/page?_pageid=53,53086&_da
d=portal&_schema=PORTAL
Diagnostic individual Reciprocal Social
Observation Interactive play-based Interaction
Schedule format Imagination/Creativity
(ADOS/ Yields algorithm cutoff or Play
ADOS-G)** scores for autism and Stereotyped Behaviors
Lord, Rutter, autism spectrum and Restricted
DiLavore, & Interests
Risi (2001)
Autism S .5-1.5 18-item direct observational 20 min. Visual Tracking
Bryson, S. E., McDermott, C., Rombough, V.,

Brian, J., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2000). The
Observation measure Disengagement of
autism observation scale for infants

[Unpublished Scale]. Toronto, ON.
Scale for Seven activities Attention
Infants administered in an Orientation to Name
(AOSI)** interactive, play-based Reciprocal Social
Bryson, format Smiling
McDermott, Yields indication of the Differential
Rombough, presence or absence of Response to Facial
Brian, & skill in each of the areas Emotion
Zwaigenbau assessed Social Anticipation
m (2000) Imitation
Autism S 2-14 Test consists of five Varies Autism Behavior
http://www.proedinc.com/customer/d
Screening components (one subtest Checklist
Instrument is administered to a Sample of vocal
for parent/teacher while the behavior
Educational remaining four subtests Interaction
efault.aspx
Planning are administered to the assessment
Pro-Ed
(ASIEP-3)** individual). Choice of Educational

Krug, Arick, subtests depends on the assessment
Almond results from the Autism Prognosis of learning
(2008) Behavior Checklist and the rate
purpose of the assessment
Yields standard scores and
percentile ranks


except Administer
where
noted)
Autism- S 9.8-15.4 Parent report questionnaire Approx. 20 Five subdomains:
http://www.autismresearchcentre.c
om/tests/aq_adolescent_test.asp
Spectrum 50 items, from “definitely min. - Social skills
Quotient agree” to “definitely - Attention switching
Autism Research Centre

(AQ)- disagree” - Attention to detail
Adolescent Yields cutoff scores - Communication
version - Imagination
Baron-Cohen,
Hoekstra,
Knickmeyer,
&
Wheelwright
(2006)
Autism- S 4-11 Parent report questionnaire Approx. 20 Five subdomains:
http://www.autismresearchce
ntre.com/tests/aq_child.asp
Spectrum 50 items, from “definitely min. - Social skills

Quotient agree” to “definitely - Attention switching
(AQ)-Child disagree” - Attention to detail
version, Yields cutoff scores - Communication
Auyeung, - Imagination
Baron-Cohen,
Wheelwright,
& Allison
(2008)


except Administer
where
noted)
Autism S 6-17 Questionnaire for parents or 10 min. Social
questionnaire for Asperger Syndrome and other high-functioning

autism spectrum disorders in school-age children. Journal of
Spectrum teachers Communicative
Screening 27 items, 3-point scale behavioral
Ehlers, S., Gillberg, C., & Wing, L. (1999). A screening
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 129-141.

Questionnaire Yields cutoff scores impairments
(ASSQ) Restricted intellectual
Ehlers, interests
Gillberg, &
Wing (1999)


except Administer
where
noted)
Checklist for S 1.5 A screening tool 5-10 min. Joint attention

Autism in administered through Pretend play
Toddlers parent interview and
(CHAT)** observation
http://www.autism.org.uk/en-gb/working-with/health/screening-and-
Baron-Cohen 14 items (9 items asked to
et al. (1992, the parents and 5
1996) observation items
diagnosis/checklist-for-autism-in-toddlers-chat.aspx
administered by the
physician)
5 key items are used to
The National Autistic Society

identify risk of developing
autism: pretend play,
protodeclarative pointing,
following a point,
pretending, producing a
point
Yields cutoff scores. Failure
on all 5 key items suggests
high risk of developing
autism while failure on two
specific items suggests a
“medium risk”
Children who fail the initial
screening should be
screened again after one
month. Those who fail the
second screening should
be referred for formal
testing


except Administer
where
noted)
Childhood S 4-11 Parent questionnaire Approx. 20 N/A
http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_pageid=53 http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/tests/cast_tes
Asperger 37 yes/no items min.
Syndrome Yields cutoff score
Test (CAST)
(Scott, Baron-

Cohen,
Bolton, &
Brayne, 2002)
t.asp
Childhood D Children 2 15 items are rated on a 7- 60-90 min. Relating to people
Autism Rating and over point scale based on to interview Imitative behavior
Scale observation, parent report, parents; Emotional response
,53086&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
(CARS)** and other records 10-15 min. Body use

Schopler, Yields a total score with to rate Object use
Reichler, & three classifications: Not items Adaptation to change
Renner autistic, mild or Visual response
(1988) moderately autistic, or Listening response
severely autistic Perceptive response
Fear and anxiety
Verbal communication
Nonverbal
communication
Activity level
Level and consistency
of intellective
relations
General impressions


except Administer
where
noted)
Development S 4-18 The DBC-ASA is a subset of 5-10 min. N/A
http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_pageid=5
al Behavior items derived from the
Checklist- DBC-P (Developmental
3,53086&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
Autism Checklist-Parent/primary

Screening caregiver report)
Algorithm Yields cutoff score
(DBC-ASA)
Brereton,
Tonge,
Mackinnon,
& Einfeld
(2002)
Development S 1.5-4 The DBC-ES is a subset of 5-10 min. N/A
http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_pageid=5
al Checklist- items derived from the
Early Screen DBC-P (Developmental
3,53086&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
(DBC-ES) Checklist–Parent/primary

Gray, K. M., & caregiver report)
Tonge, B. J. Yields cutoff score
(2005)


except Administer
where
noted)
*Diagnostic D All ages Semi-structured interview 3 hrs. Infancy
services/diagnosing-complex-needs/the-diagnostic-
interview-for-social-and-communication-disorders-
Interview for and all schedule Age of recognition
Social and levels of Respondents are parents or Developmental:
http://www.autism.org.uk/en-gb/our-
Eliot House, National Autistic Society
Communicati ability other caregivers Gross-motor skills
on Disorders Provisional diagnostic Self-care
(DISCO)** algorithms are provided Communication
Wing, for autism; responses on Social interaction
Leekam, specific items are used to Imitation
disco.aspx
Libby, Gould, assist in diagnosis of Imagination
& Larcombe autism Skills: Visuo-spatial
(2002) Other: Untypical
behavior not directly
related to a specific
developmental
domain
Early S 1 14-item screening checklist 10-15 min. Pretend play
Swinkels, S. H., Dietz, C., van Daalen, E., Kerkhof, I. H., van Engeland, H., &
to 15 months. I: The development of the Early Screening of Autistic Traits

Buitelaar, J. K. (2006). Screening for autistic spectrum in children aged 14
Questionnaire (ESAT). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,

Screening of for parents/caregivers Joint attention
Autistic Traits Administered by health Interest in others
(ESAT)** practitioner Eye contact
Swinkels, Yes/no responses Verbal and nonverbal
Dietz, van Yields cutoff score communication
Daalen, Stereotypes
Kerkhof, van Preoccupations
Engeland, & Reaction to sensory
Buitelaar stimuli
36(6), 723-732.
(2006) Emotional reaction
Social interaction


except Administer
where
noted)
*Gilliam S 3-22 32-item parent/caregiver, 5-10 min. Social Interaction
http://www.proedinc.com/cu
Asperger’s teacher questionnaire Restricted Patterns
stomer/default.aspx
Disorder Includes a parent interview Cognitive Patterns
Scale (GADS) form to gather information Pragmatic Skills
Pro-Ed
Gilliam (2003) about language and
cognitive development,
self-help skills, adaptive
behavior, and curiosity
Yields standard scores and
percentiles
*Gilliam D 3-22 42 items: 3 subscales 5-10 min. Stereotyped behaviors
http://www2.gsu.edu/~p http://www.proedinc.com/ http://www.proedinc.com/

customer/default.aspx
Autism Rating Items rated on frequency of Communication
Scale-Second occurrence based on direct Social interaction
Edition observation and parent
Pro-Ed
(GARS-2) interview
Gilliam (2006) Yields standard scores and
percentiles for the
subscales as well as the
total “Autism Index”
Krug S 6-11/12- 32-item parent/caregiver, 15-20 min. N/A
customer/default.aspx
Asperger’s 21 teacher questionnaire
Disorder Respondents first complete
Index (KADI)- the prescreening scale
Pro-Ed
Elementary Additional items are
form/Second completed based on the
ary form results of this scale
Krug & Arick Yields standard scores and
(2003) percentiles
Modified S 1.5-2.5 23-item yes/no 10-15 min. N/A
sydlr/DianaLRobins/Offici
University of Georgia
CHAT Website.html
Checklist for parent/caregiver
Autism in questionnaire
Toddlers Designed to screen for al_M-
(M-CHAT) autism
Robbins, Fein, Yields cutoff score
Barton, &
Green (2001)


except Administer
where
noted)
*Monteiro D School- The MIGDAS provides -Pre- Pre-Interview Checklist
http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_pageid=53,53086&_dad=portal
Interview aged guidelines for conducting the Interview Cognitive Level
Guidelines for children parent interview, teacher Checklist: 15- Academic Achievement
Diagnosing and teens, interview, and student 30 min. Language and
Asperger’s as well as diagnostic interview. The Communication
Syndrome verbal MIGDAS consists of three Parent History
(MIGDAS)** preschool- parts: Interview: Preoccupations and

Monteiro ers Pre-Interview Checklist is a 60-90 min. Interests
(2008) yes/no questionnaire for Organizational Skills
&_schema=PORTAL
professionals to complete Teacher Physical Coordination
Parent and Teacher Interview – Interview: Anxiety Level
semi-structured interview 30-45 min. Affective Vocabulary
Student Diagnostic Interview – Social Skills
provides prompts for the Student Sensory Issues
evaluators and guidelines for Diagnostic Previous and Current
observations Interview: Diagnoses
Yields qualitative descriptions 45-60 min.
in each of these areas:
Language and
communication, social
relationships and emotional
responses, and sensory use
and interests
Pervasive S 1-4 Parent/caregiver questionnaire 15 min. N/A
http://www.pearsonassessments.co
us/productdetail.htm?pid=076-
Developmental Stage 1-Primary Care Screener
1635-106&mode=summary
m/haiweb/cultures/en-
Disorders (Stage 1-PCS), 22 items
Screening Test, Stage 2-Developmental Clinic
Second Edition Screener (Stage 2-DCS), 14
Pearson
(PDDST-II) items
Siegel (2004) Stage 3-Autism Clinic Severity
Screener (Stage 3-ACSS), 12
items
41 supplemental items
Yields cutoff scores


except Administer
where
noted)
*Social S Over 4 40-item parent questionnaire 10-15 min. Reciprocal Social
pageid=53,53086&_dad=portal&_schema=P ageid=53,53086&_dad=portal&_schema=POR
http://kc.vanderbilt.edu/triad/training/page. http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_ http://portal.wpspublish.com/portal/page?_p
Communica- Additional Lifetime Form that Interaction
tion examines developmental Language &

Questionnaire history Communication
(SCQ) Yields total score with cutoff Stereotyped Patterns of
Rutter, Bailey, points Behavior
Lord, &
TAL
Berument
(2003)
[formerly the
Autism
Screening
Questionnaire
(ASQ)]
Social S/D 4-18 65-item parent/caregiver, 15-20 min. Social Awareness

Responsive- teacher questionnaire Social Cognition

ness Scale Respondents answer Social Communication
(SRS) questions on a 4-point scale Social Motivation
Constantino from “not true” to “almost Autistic Mannerisms
& Gruber always true”
ORTAL
(2005) Yields T-scores for a total
(overall score) and five
treatment subscales
Screening Tool S 2-3 Interactive play-based 20 min. Play

for Autism in Yields scores on four domains Motor imitation
Two-Year-Olds Requesting
Vanderbilt Kennedy Center
(STAT)** Directing attention
Stone,
aspx?id=821
Coonrod, &
Ousley (2000)
*Instrument includes information related to developmental history.

**Instrument requires special training to administer.

Research on Screening and Assessment Instruments

The following table summarizes the research on autism screening and assessment tools
reviewed in this section.
Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale (ASDS)
Author (Year) Age Range Sample Topic Outcome

(in years) Size Addressed r = correlation
Boggs, Gross, 5-17 76 Divergent and Weak correlation between ASQ and AS (r =
& Gohm convergent 0.23);
(2006) validity AU group r = 0.65, Intellectually Gifted r = 0.49,
No Ruling group r = 0.51;
Discriminative Prediction accuracy rate: 93.2% for AS and Non-
validity AS, 72.7% for AS and AU, 87.9% for AS and AU
when all three measures were used;
ASQ and SSRS scores significantly highly
inversely related
(-0.76);
ASQ is able to discriminate between clinical and
non-clinical groups: t-test = -17.41

Autism Behavior Checklist (ABC)
Author Age Range Sample Topic Outcome

(Year) (in years Size Addressed r = correlation
except
where
noted)
Eaves & Mean age = 198 Reliability and Alpha coefficients: Reliability for Total Score –
Williams 101.32 mos. construct adequate for screening:
(2006) validity Krug, Arick, & Almond (1993): Total Score r =
0.89;
Miranda-Linné & Melin (2002) scores: Total Score
r = 0.86
Reliability for scales – not reliable:
Krug, Arick, & Almond (1993): Sensory r = 0.59,
Relating r = 0.75, Body & Object Use r = 0.76,
Language r = 0.60, Social & Self-Help r = 0.57;
Miranda-Linné & Melin (2002): Nonresponsive
Behavior r = 0.81, Infant-like Behavior r = 0.68,
Aggressive Behavior r = 0.66, Stereotypical
Behavior r = 0.63, Echolalic Speech r = 0.74
Alternate factors identified
Eaves, Mean age 107 Criterion- Validity between ABC and PDDRS (partial
Campbell, & Autistic – related and coefficients) Total = 8.80;
Chambers 96.81 mos. construct Sensitivity of ABC = 77%
(2006) Nonautistic validity Specificity of ABC = 91%
– 126.09 Overall Classification Accuracy = 80% (two x two
months matrix);
When compared with PDDRS classifications,
overall agreement = 85% with phi coefficient for
nominal classifications = 0.68


(Year) (in years Size Addressed r = correlation
except
where
noted)
Rellini, 1.5-11 65 Criterion Sensitivity = 54%
Tortolani, validity False negatives = 46%
Trillo,
Carbone, &
Montecchi
(2004)
Miranda- 5-22 383 Factor No data reported for the five factors
Linné & analysis
Melin
(2002)
Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R)
Author (Year) Age Sample Topic Outcome

Range Size Addressed
(in years)
Lecavalier, 5-17 226 Validity Internal consistency (coefficient alpha) of
Aman, Scahill, domain scores = 0.54-0.84
McDougle, Convergent validity (Spearman-ranked
McCracken, correlation coefficients) – Social and total ADI-R
et al. (2006) had highest correlations to other instruments,
range = -0.29 to 0.35, depending on scale and
domain
Risi, Lord, 1.5-14 1,297 Diagnostic Strict autism criteria used in combination with
Gotham, sensitivity and ADOS – 80% or higher for U.S. sample, 75% or
Corsello, specificity higher for Canadian sample; lower for single use
Chrysler, et and use for other PDDs
al. (2006)


(in years)
Saemundsen, 2-9.5 54 Concurrent ADI-R definition for autism used – 66.7% with
Magnússon, validity CARS
Smári, &
Sigurdardóttir
(2003)
Wiggins & 1.5-3 142 Concurrent Agreement improved with removal of Behavioral
Robins (2008) validity Domain of ADI-R (percent agreement with other
measures):
ADOS:
AU class = 0.790, non-AU class = 0.701
CARS:
AU class = 0.708 , non-AU class +0.753
LeCouter, 2-4 101 Concurrent Agreement with ADOS: AU Social Interaction =
Haden, validity 78% , AU Communication = 74%; Above/below
Hammal, & AU cutoff = 81%, Above/below spectrum cutoff
McConachie = 78%
(2008)
Ventola, 1.5-2.5 45 Concurrent Cohen’s kappa:
Kleinman, validity ADOS and clinical judgment = 0.593
Pandey, ADOS and CARS = 0.619
Barton, Allen, CARS and clinical judgment = 0.691
Green, ADI-R and ADOS = 0.066
Robins, & ADI-R and CARS = 0.095
Fein (2006) ADI-R and clinical judgment = 0.153
Constantino, AU Group 61 Concurrent Pearson’s coefficient correlation:
Davis, Todd, – mean validity SRS and ADI-R or DSM criteria = 0.7
Schindler, age = 8.0,
Gross, et al. Asperger
(2003) PDD-NOS
– mean
age = 11.4
Non-PDD
– mean
age = 13.2


(in
years)
Mazefsky & 1.75-8 78 Discriminative 73% agreement with team diagnoses; improved
Oswald (2006) validity to 77% with team diagnoses when PDD-NOS and
ASP removed
Mildenberger, Mean Group 1 Discriminative 2 of 27 subjects were misclassified: one subject
Sitter, age of 9 – 16 validity with infantile autism did not meet cutoff scores
Noterdaeme, children on all three dimensions, one subject with severe
& Amorosa Group 2 receptive language disorder was classified as
(2001) – autistic on all three dimensions
11
children
Gray, Tonge, & 1.5-4.5 209 Discriminative ADI-R and AU = 0.46
Sweeney validity ADOS and AU = 0.73
(2008) ADSO and AU = 0.62
ADI-R and ADOS = 0.35 (Cohen’s kappa)
Frazier, Factor analysis Mixed; subscales need revision
Youngstrom,
Kubu, Sinclair,
& Rezai (2008)
Moss, Magiati, Time 1 35 Test-retest 80% for all three domains; Pearson correlation =
Charman, & – 2.3- reliability 0.59
Howlin (2008) 4.5
Time 2
– 9.1 –
12.1
Cicchetti, Lord, 3.5 1 Interrater 94-96% with weighted kappas between 0.80 and
Koenig, Klin, & reliability 0.88
Volkmar
(2008)


(in
years)
deBildt, 5-20 184 Criterion Sensitivity:
Sytema, validity and PDD: ADOS-G = .874
Ketelaars, reliability PDD: ADI-R = .716
Kraijer, AD: ADOS-G = .917
Mulder, et al. AD: ADI-R = .771
(2004) Specificity:
PDD: ADOS-G = .472
PDD: ADI-R = .787
AD: ADOS-G = .647
AD: ADI-R = .632
Agreement (percentage):
Age 5-8 = 83.4 for AD, 81.0 for PDD
Age 8+ = 57.8 for AD, 58.5 for PDD
Total = 63.6 for AD, 63.6 for PDD
Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS)

(Year) (in years) Size Addressed
Gray, Tonge, 1.5-4.5 209 Discriminative ADI-R and AU = 0.46

& Sweeney validity ADOS and AU = 0.73
(2008) ADSO and AU = 0.62
ADI-R and ADOS = 0.35 (Cohen’s kappa)
Gotham, Risi, 1.2-16 1,630 Diagnostic Use of new algorithms:
Pickles, & validity Sensitivity:
Lord (2007) AU vs. Non-Spectrum = 85-96
Non-AU AU vs. Non-Spectrum = 61-90;
Specificity:
AU vs. Non-Spectrum = 50-97
Non-AU AU vs. Non-Spectrum = 12-79
(lowest for Module 1 – no words)
New algorithms increase specificity 12-31%
in classifying Non-AU AU in lower-functioning
subjects


Lord, Risi, Module 1 54 Interrater and (Interclass correlations, weighted kappas)

Lambrecht, – 1.25-10 test-retest Interrater:
Cook, reliability and Social = 0.93
Leventhal, et Module 2 55 discriminative Communication = 0.84
al. (2000) – 2-7 validity Social Communication = .92
Restricted Repetitive = 0.82
Module 3 59 Test-Retest:
– 3-20 Social = 0.78
Communication = 0.73
Module 4 45 Social Communication = .82
– Restricted Repetitive = 0.59
10-40 Discriminative Validity:
(223 95% for AU
t-total) 92% for Non-Spectrum
33% for PDD-NOS as having Non-AU AU (53% of
PDD-NOS fell in the AU range);
Specificity:
AU vs. PDD-NOS and Non-Spectrum = 68-79,
AU and PDD-NOS vs Non-Spectrum = 87-94,
AU to Non-Spectrum = 93-100,
PDD-NOS to Non-Spectrum = 88-94;
Sensitivity:
AU vs. PDD-NOS and Non-Spectrum = 87-100,
AU and PDD-NOS vs. Non-Spectrum = 90-97,
AU to Non-Spectrum = 93-100,
PDD-NOS to Non-Spectrum = 80-94


deBildt, 5-20 184 Criterion Sensitivity:

Sytema, validity and PDD: ADOS-G = .874
Ketelaars, reliability PDD: ADI-R = .716
Kraijer, AD: ADOS-G = .917
Molder, et al. AD: ADI-R = .771
(2004) Specificity:
PDD: ADOS-G = .472
PDD: ADI-R = .787
AD: ADOS-G = .647
AD: ADI-R = .632
Agreement (percentage):
Age 5-8 = 83.4 for AD, 81.0 for PDD
Age 8+ = 57.8 for AD, 58.5 for PDD
Total = 63.6 for AD, 63.6 for PDD
Overton, 1.67-16 26 ADOS +/-

Fielding, & algorithm Revised algorithm resulted in better accuracy
Garcia (2008) scores for more severe group
compared to
new algorithm
scores
LeCouter, 2-4 101 Concurrent Agreement with ADOS: AU Social Interaction =
Haden, validity 78% , AU Communication= 74%; Above/below
Hammal,& AU cutoff = 81%; Above/below spectrum cutoff
McConachie = 78%
(2008)
Risi, Lord, 1.5-14 1,297 Diagnostic Strict autism criteria used in combination with
Gotham, sensitivity and ADI-R: 80% or higher for U.S. sample, 75% or
Corsello, specificity higher for Canadian sample; lower for single
Chrysler, et use and use for other PDDs
al. (2006)
Mazefsky & 2-8 78 Discriminative 77% agreement with team diagnosis
Oswald validity
(2006)

Autism Observation Scale for Infants (AOSI)

Range Size Addressed r = correlation
(in
years)
Bryson, .5 32 Interrater Good to Excellent at 6 (0.74), 12 (0.93), and 18
Zwaigenbaum, reliability months (0.94) for total scores; Across ages =
McDermott, 1 34 0.92 (unweighted kappas)
Rombough, &
Brian (2008) 1.5 26 Test-retest Acceptable at 12 months (0.61) (intra-class
reliability correlations)
Autism Spectrum Quotient-Child Version (AQ-Child)

(in
years)
Auyeung, 4-9 1,225 Discriminative Clinical groups scored significantly higher than
Baron-Cohen, control validity typically developing, but not significantly
Wheelwright, 192 ASD different from each other; significant sex
& Allison Mean 348 differences in control group, but not in clinical
(2008) age 7.58 AS/HFA group
Mean 26 PDD- Specificity 95%

age 9.31 NOS
Internal Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.97, subscales
consistency = 0.83-0.93
No age 4 atypical
reported Factor analysis Support for four of five subscales
No age AU Test-retest r = 0.85

reported reliability


(in
years)
Wakabayashi, AS/HFA: 81 Cross-cultural Cronbach’s alpha coefficient = 0.84, subscales
Baron-Cohen, mean comparison: = 0.7-0.8;
Uchiyama, age of UK to Japan AS/HFA and PDD-NOS scored higher than
Yoshida, Tojo, 10.4 Reliability control group (27.083 and 12.189,
et al. (2007) respectively);
PDD- 22 AS/HFA scored higher (t = 2.688) than PDD-
NOS: Validity NOS;
mean males scored higher than females in control
age of group (t = 2.209), but no difference in clinical
10.10 group (Group 1: t = 1.585; Group 2: t = 1.791);
results similar to UK data, although mean AQ
Controls: 372 score in Japan was lower
mean
age of
10.9

Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire (ASSQ)

(in years)
Ehlers, Gillberg, & 6-17 110 Divergent Pearson correlation:
Wing (1999) validity Parent: 0.75 with Rutter scale; 0.58 with
Conners
Teacher: 0.77 with Rutter scale; 0.70
with Conners
Test-retest
reliability Very high (Pearson r):
Teachers = 0.94
Parents = 0.96
Interrater
reliability Good (Pearson r): 0.66
Posserud, 7-9 9,430 Interrater Low to moderate (Cohen’s kappa) -
Lundervold, & reliability Teachers and Parents:
Gillberg (2006) Boys = 0.48, Girls = 0.34
Distribution of Boys scored higher; parents reported

autistic more symptoms than teachers,
features especially for girls
Posserud, 7-9 9,430 Factor Three-factor structure: social difficulties,
Lundervold, analysis tics/motor/OCD, autistic style
Steijnen,
Verhoeven,
Stormark,
& Gillberg (2008)

Checklist for Autism in Toddlers (CHAT)

(in years)
Scambler, Time 1 – AU group – Test-retest Original CHAT authors’ criteria = 83%
Hepburn, & 2-3.5 19 reliability Denver modification of CHAT criteria =
Rogers (2006) Time 2 – 93%
4-5
Time 1 – Develop-
2-3.75 mental
Time 2 – disabilities
4-6 group – 11
Scambler, Rogers, 2-3 44 Discriminative Original CHAT authors’ criteria:
& Wehner (2001) validity Sensitivity = 65%
Specificity = 100%
Slightly altered criteria:
Sensitivity = 85%
Specificity = 100%
Baird, Charman, 1.5 16,235 Discriminative Sensitivity = 38%

Baron-Cohen, 3 validity Specificity = 98%
Cox, Swettenham, 5 PPV: High risk = 26.3%, All PDDs = 28.9%
et al. (2000)

Childhood Asperger Syndrome Test (CAST)
Author Age Sample Topic Addressed Outcome

(Year) Range (in Size
years)
Scott, Baron- 4-11 Pilot – 13 Discriminative Pilot:
Cohen, with AS; 37 validity ANOVA = 150.13; significant difference
Bolton, & neurotypic between clinical sample and controls
Brayne al Main: (cutoff at 15)
(2002) Main study AS-PPV = 0.82, Specificity = 0.99;
– 174 AS and AU Spectrum- PPV = 0.64,
Specificity = 0.98
Williams, 5-11 1,925 Accuracy Sensitivity = 100%
Scott, Stott, Specificity = 97%
Allison, Validity
Bolton, -predictive PPV = 50%
Baron- criterion validity
Cohen, &
Brayne Test-retest Scores rarely increase over time, many
(2005) reliability decrease
Allison, 5-9 73 Test-retest Moderate – 0.67 (Spearman’s rho)
Williams, reliability
Scott, Stott,
Bolton,
Baron-
Cohen, &
Brayne
(2007)

Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS)
Author (Year) Age Sample Size Topic Outcome

(in years Addressed r = correlation
except
where
noted)
Rellini, 1.5-11 65 Criterion Sensitivity for AU = 100%
Tortolani, validity False negatives = 0
Trillo,
Carbone, &
Montecchi
(2004)
DiLalla & 2-6 69 Factor Yields three factors: social impairment,
Rogers (1994) analysis negative emotionality and distorted sensory
response
Pilowsky, 1.5-3.4 83 Concurrent Agreement with ADI-R = 85.7%
Yirmiya, validity
Shulman, &
Dover (1998)
Saemundsen, 1.8-9.5 54 Concurrent Agreement with ADI-R = 66.7% when ADI-R
Magnússon, validity AU definition is used
Smári, &
Sigurdardóttir
(2003)
Magyar & 1.5-6.5 164 Factor Four factors identified: social
Pandolfi analysis communication, social interaction,
(2007) stereotypes and sensory abnormalities,
emotional regulation
Perry, 2-6 274 Discrimina- 88% agreement between CARS and clinical
Condillac, tive validity diagnosis;
Freeman, Sensitivity = 0.94;
Dunn-Geier, Specificity = 0.85;
& Belair CARS negatively correlated with cognitive (r
(2005) = -0.67) and adaptive (r = -0.69);
ANOVA = 157.97;
AU group mean> PDD-NOS>MR>
Developmental delay and other groups

Author (Year) Age Sample Size Topic Outcome

(in years Addressed r = correlation
except
where
noted)
Stella, AU mean 90 Factor Five-factor structure: disturbances in social
Mundy, & of 71.32 analysis orienting, communication and behavioral
Tuchman months; flexibility, emotional reactivity, consistency
(1999) PDD-NOS of cognitive performance and response to
mean of environment, odd sensory experiences
50.54
Developmental Behavior Checklist-Autism Screening Algorithm (DBC-ASA)

(Year) Range (in Size r = correlation
years)
Brereton, 4-18 180 Discriminative Sensitivity = 0.86
Tonge, validity Specificity = 0.69
Mackinnon,
& Einfeld
(2002)
Witwer & 8.3-10.2 49 Discriminative Sensitivity = 0.94
Lecavalier validity Specificity = 0.46
(2007) Concurrent (decreased when behavior problems
validity present)
r = 0.53

Diagnostic Interview for Social and Communication Disorders (DISCO)
Author Age Sample Topic Outcome

(Year) Range (in Size Addressed
years)
Wing, 3-11 82 Interrater Kappa coefficient or intra-class correlation
Leekam, reliability at 0.75 or higher for over 80% of interview
Libby, Gould, items
& Larcombe
(2002)
Leekam, 3-11.5 91 Interrater Kappas for both algorithms at 0.82
Libby, Wing, reliability
Gould, &
Taylor (2002)
Gilliam Autism Rating Scale-Second Edition (GARS-2)

(Year) Range (in Size
years)
Mazefsky & 2-8 78 Discriminative Mean developmental delay score and
Oswald validity mean AU Quotient did not significantly
(2006) differ

Screening Tool for Autism in Two-Years-Olds (STAT)
Author Age Sample Topic Outcome

(Year) Range (in Size Addressed
years)
Stone, 2-3 52 Discriminative Cutoff of 2:
Coonrod, validity Sensitivity = 0.92
Turner, & Specificity = 0.85
Pozdol PPV = 0.86
(2004) NPV = 0.92
Concurrent Cohen’s kappa = 0.95

validity
Inter-observer agreement = 1.00 (Cohen’s
Interrater kappa);
reliability Test-retest = 0.90 (Cohen’s kappa)

Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ)

(Year) Range (in Size r = correlation
years)
Allen, Silove, 2-6 81 Discriminative Cutoff of 11:
Williams, & validity Good for screening in 3- to 5-year-olds;
Hutchins Sensitivity = 100%
(2007) Specificity = 62%;
poor in 2- to 3-year-olds
Sensitivity = 93%
Specificity = 58%
Chandler, 9.8 to 255 Discriminative AU and non-AU:
Charman, 14.5 validity Sensitivity = 0.88
Baird, Specificity = 0.72
Simonoff, AU and non-AU:
Loucas, et al. Sensitivity = 0.90
(2007) Specificity = 0.86
Wiggins, 1.5-3.75 37 Discriminative Cutoff 15:
Bakeman, validity Sensitivity = 0.47
Adamson, & Specificity = 0.89
Robins Cutoff 11:
(2007) Sensitivity = 0.89
Specificity = 0.89
Eaves, 5 (mean) 151 Discriminative Sensitivity = 0.71
Wingert, Ho, validity Specificity:
& Mickelson Preschool clinic = 0.62
(2006) AU clinic = 0.53
Witwer & 8.3 49 Discriminative Sensitivity = 0.92
Lecavalier (mean) validity Specificity = 0.62
(2007) r = 53
Concurrent
validity

Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS)
Author Age Range Sample Topic Addressed Outcome

(Year) (in years) Size
Constantino, AU Group: 61 Discriminative Pearson’s coefficient correlation:
Davis, Todd, mean age validity SRS and ADI-R or DSM criteria = 0.7
Schindler, = 8.0
Gross, et al. Asperger Teacher and father = 0.75;
(2003) PDD-NOS: Interrater Mother = 0.91
mean age reliability
= 11.4
Non-PDD:
mean age
= 13.2
Misconceptions
Myth Reality
Autism is a medical diagnosis. Currently no medical tests can be used to diagnose an
autism spectrum disorder. The disorder is identified
behaviorally.
If a student can pass the state exam and Educational need extends beyond academics and
make passing grades, he/she does not includes communication, social, emotional, and adaptive
have an educational need for special skills.
education.
Asperger Syndrome means that an Individuals with Asperger Syndrome have a pervasive
individual is high functioning and, developmental disorder. It is impossible to have a
therefore, does not require special “pervasive” disorder and not be significantly impacted.
education support and services. While many of these individuals are highly intelligent and
articulate, they do have significant impairments and most
often require supports and services in order to make
educational progress.

References
Allen, C. W., Silove, N., Williams, K., & Hutchins, P. (2007). Validity of the Social Communication
Questionnaire in assessing risk of autism in preschool children with developmental
problems. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1272-1278.
Allison, C., Williams, J., Scott, F., Stott, C., Bolton, P., Baron-Cohen, S., & Brayne, C. (2007). The
Childhood Asperger’s Syndrome Test (CAST): Test-retest reliability in a high scoring
sample. Autism, 11(2), 173-185.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders.
Fourth edition-Text revision. Washington, DC: Author.
Auyeung, B., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., & Allison, C. (2008). The autism Spectrum Quotient:
Children’s Version (AQ-Child). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1230-
1240.
Baird, G., Charman, T., Baron-Cohen, S., Cox, A., Swettenham, J., Wheelwright, S., & Drew, A.
(2000). A screening instrument for autism at 18 months of age: A 6-year follow-up study.
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 39(6), 694-702.
Baron-Cohen, S., Allen, J., & Gillberg, C. (1992). Can autism be detected at 18 months? The
needle, the haystack, and the CHAT. British Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 839-843.
Baron-Cohen, S., Cox, A., Baird, G., Swettenham, J., Nightingale, N., Morgan, K., et al. (1996).
Psychological markers in the detection of autism in infancy in a large population. British
Journal of Psychiatry, 168(2), 158-163.
Baron-Cohen, S., Hoekstra, R. A., Knickmeyer, R., & Wheelwright, S. (2006). The autism-spectrum
quotient (AQ)-Adolescent version. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(3),
343-350.
Bishop, S. L., Luyster, R., Richler, J., & Lord, C. (2008). Diagnostic Assessment. In K. Chawarska, A.
Klin, & F. R. Volkmar (Eds.), Autism Spectrum Disorders in Infants and Toddlers: Diagnosis,
Assessment, and Treatment (pp. 23-49). New York: Guilford Press.
Boggs, K. M., Gross, A. M., & Gohm, C. L. (2006). Validity of the Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic
Scale. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 18(2), 163-182.
Brereton, A. V., Tonge, B. J., Mackinnon, A. J., & Einfeld, S. L. (2002). Screening young people for
autism using the Developmental Behaviour Checklist. Journal of the American Academy
of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 41(11), 1-7.
Bryson, S. E., McDermott, C., Rombough, V., Brian, J., & Zwaigenbaum, L. (2000). The Autism
Observation Scale for Infants [Unpublished Scale]. Toronto, ON.
Bryson, S. E., Zwaigenbaum, L., McDermott, C., Rombough, V., & Brian, J. (2008). The Autism
Observation Scale for Infants: Scale development and reliability data. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 38, 731-738.
Chandler, S., Charman, T., Baird, G., Simonoff, E., Loucas, T., et al. (2007). Validation of the Social
Communication Questionnaire in a population cohort of children with autism spectrum
disorders. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 46(10), 1324-
1332.
Charak, D. A., & Stella, J. L. (2001-2002). Screening and diagnostic instruments for identification
of autism spectrum disorders in children, adolescents, and young adults: A selective
review. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 27(1-2), 5-17.
Charman, T., & Baird, G. (2002). Practitioner review: Diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder in 2-
and 3-year-old children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(3), 289-305.
Charman, T., Taylor, E., Drew, A., Cockerill, H., Brown, J. A., & Baird, G. (2005). Outcome at 7
years of children diagnosed with autism at age 2: Predictive validity of assessments
conducted at 2 and 3 years of age and pattern of symptom change over time. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46, 500-513.
Cicchetti, D. V., Lord, C., Koenig, K., Klin, A., & Volkmar, F. R. (2008). Reliability of the ADI-R: Multiple
examiners evaluate a single case. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(4), 764-
770.
Constantino, J. N., Davis, S. A., Todd, R. D., Schindler, M. K., & Gross, M. M., et al. (2003).
Validation of a brief quantitative measure of autistic traits: comparison of the Social
Responsiveness Scale with the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised. Journal of Autism
and Developmental Disorders, 33(4), 427-433.
Constantino, J. N., & Gruber, C. P. (2005). Social Responsiveness Scale. Los Angeles: Western
Psychological Services.
Dawson, G., & Osterling, J. (1997). Early intervention in autism: The effectiveness of early
intervention. In M. J. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 307-
326). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Company.
deBildt, A., Sytema, S., Ketelaars, C., Kraijer, D., Mulder, E., Volkmar, F., & Minderaa, R. (2004).
Interrelationship between Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G),
Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R), and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR) Classification in children and adolescents with mental
retardation. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(2), 129-137.
DiLalla, D. L., & Rogers, S. J. (1994). Domains of the Childhood Autism Rating Scale: Relevance for
diagnosis and treatment. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24(2), 115-128.

DiLavore, P., Lord, C., & Rutter, M. (1995). Pre-Linguistic Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule
(PL-ADOS). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 25, 355-379.
Eaves, R. C., Campbell, H. A., & Chambers, D. (2006). Criterion-related and construct validity of
the pervasive developmental disorders rating scale and the autism behavior checklist.
Psychology in the Schools, 37(4), 311-321.
Eaves, L. C., & Ho, H. H. (2004). The very early identification of autism: Outcome to age 4 1/2-5.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 367-378.
Eaves, R. C., & Williams, T. O. (2006). The reliability and construct validity for the autism
behavior checklist. Psychology in the Schools, 43(2), 129-142.
Eaves, L. C., Wingert, H., Ho, H. H., & Mickelson, E. (2006). Screening for autism spectrum
disorders with the Social Communication Questionnaire. Journal of Developmental and
Behavioral Pediatrics, 27(2), Supplement 2, S95-S103.
Ehlers, S., Gillberg, C., & Wing, L. (1999) A screening questionnaire for Asperger Syndrome and
other high-functioning autism spectrum disorders in school age children. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 129-141.
Eikeseth, S., Smith, T., Jahr, K., & Eldevik, S. (2007). Outcome for children with autism who began
intensive behavioral treatment between ages 4 and 7: A comparison controlled study.
Behavior Modification, 31(3), 264-278.
Filipek, P. A., Accardo, P. L., Baranek, G. T., Cook, E. H., Dawson, G., Gordon, B. et al. (1999). The
screening and diagnosis of autistic spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 29, 439-484.
Frazier, T. W., Youngstrom, E. A., Kubu, C. S., Sinclair, L., & Rezai, A. (2008). Exploratory and
confirmatory factor analysis of the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised. Journal of
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(3), 474-480.
Freeman, B. J., Cronin, P., & Candela, P. (2002). Asperger syndrome or autistic disorder? The
diagnostic dilemma. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17, 145-151.
Gilliam, J. E. (2003). Gilliam Asperger’s Disorder Scale. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Gilliam, J. E. (2006). Gilliam Autism Rating Scale-Second Edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Gotham, K., Risi, S., Pickles, A., & Lord, C. (2007). The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule:
Revised algorithms for improved diagnostic validity. Journal of Autism and
Gray, K. M., & Tonge, B. J. (2005). Screening for autism in infants and preschool children with
developmental delay. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39(5), 378-386.
Gray, K. M., Tonge, B. J., & Sweeney, D. J. (2008). Using the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised and
the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule with young children with developmental delay:
Evaluating diagnostic validity. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 657-667.
Grossman, B.G., Aspy, R & Miles, B.S. (2009). Interdisciplinary evaluation of autism spectrum
disorders: From diagnosis through program planning. Shawnee Mission, KS: Autism Asperger
Publishing Company.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004, 34 CF$ 300.101.
Krug, D. A., & Arick, J. (2003). Krug Asperger’s disorder index. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Krug, D. A., Arick, J., & Almond, P. (1993). The autism screening instrument for educational
planning, 2nd edition, ASIEP-2. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Krug, D. A., Arick, J., & Almond, P. (2008). Autism Screening Instrument for Educational Planning-
Third Edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Lecavalier, L., Aman, M. G., Scahill, L., McDougle, C. J., McCracken, J. T., Vitiello, B., et al. (2006). Validity of
the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 111(3), 199-
215.
LeCouteur, A., Haden, G., Hammal, D., & McConachie, H. (2008). Journal of Autism and
Leekam, S. R., Libby, S. J., Wing, L., Gould, J., & Taylor, C. (2002). The Diagnostic Interview for
Social and Communication Disorders: Algorithms for ICD-10 childhood autism and Wing
and Gould autistic spectrum disorder. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43(3),
327-342.
Lord, C., Risi, S., DiLavore, P. S., Shulman, C., Thurm, A., & Pickles, A. (2006). Autism from 2 to 9
years of age. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 694-701.
Lord, C., Risi, S. Lambrecht, L., Cook, E. H., Leventhal, B. L., et al. (2000). The Autism Diagnostic
Observation Schedule-Generic: A standard measure of social and communication deficits
associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
30(3), 205-233.
Lord, C., Rutter, M., DiLavore, P., & Risi, S. (2001). Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule
(ADOS) manual. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Lord, C., Rutter, M., Goode, S., Heemsbergen, J., Jordan, H., Mawhood, L., & Schopler, E. (1989).
Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule: A standardized observation of communicative
and social behavior. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 19, 185-212.

Lord, C., Rutter, M., & LeCouteur, A. (1994). The Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised: A revised
version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive
developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 24, 659-685.
Magyar, C. I., & Pandolfi, V. (2007). Factor structure evaluation of the Childhood Autism Rating
Scale. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1787-1794.
Mazefsky, C. A., & Oswald, D.P. (2006). The discriminative ability and diagnostic utility of the
ADOS-G, ADI-R, and GARS for children in a clinical setting. Autism, 10(6), 533-549.
Mildenberger, K., Sitter, S., Noterdaeme, M., & Amorosa, H. (2001). The use of the ADI-R as a
diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis of children with infantile autism and children
with a receptive language disorder. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 10, 248-255.
Miranda-Linné, F. M., & Melin, L. (2002). A factor analytic study of the Autism Behavior Checklist.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 32(3), 181-188.
Monteiro, M. (2008). Monteiro interview guidelines for diagnosing Asperger’s Syndrome: A

team-based approach. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Moss, J., Magiati, I., Charman, T., & Howlin, P. (2008). Stability of the Autism Diagnostic
Interview-Revised from pre-school to elementary school age in children with autism
spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1081-1091.
Myles, B. S., Bock, S. J., & Simpson, R. L. (2001). Asperger Syndrome Diagnostic Scale. Austin, TX: Pro-
Ed.
Overton, T., Fielding, C., & Garcia, D. (2008). Brief report: Exploratory analysis of the ADOS
Revised Algorithm: Specificity and predictive value with Hispanic children referred for
autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1166-
1169.
Perry, A., Condillac, R. A., Freeman, N. L., Dunn-Geier, J., & Belair, J. (2005). Multi-site study of
the Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS) in five clinical groups of young children. Journal
of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 35(5), 625-634.
Pilowsky, T., Yirmiya, N., Shulman, C., & Dover, R. (1998). The Autism Diagnostic Interview-
Revised and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale: Differences between diagnostic systems
and comparison between genders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,
28(2), 143-151.
Posserud, B., Lundervold, A. J., & Gillberg, C. (2006). Autistic features in a total population of 7-9-
year-old children as assessed by the ASSQ (Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire).
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47(2), 167-175.

Posserud, B., Lundervold, A. J., Steijnen, M. C., Verhoeven, S., Stormark, K. M., & Gillberg, C. (2008).
Factor analysis of the Autism Spectrum Screening Questionnaire. Autism, 12(1), 99-112.
Rellini, E., Tortolani, D., Trillo, S., Carbone, S., & Montecchi, F. (2004). Childhood Autism Rating Scale
(CARS) and Autism Behavior Checklist (ABC) correspondence and conflicts with DSM-IV
criteria in diagnosis of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(6), 703-
708.
Risi, S., Lord, C., Gotham, K., Corsello, C., Chrysler, C., Szatmari, P. et al. (2006). Combining
information from multiple sources in the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders. Journal
of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 45(9), 1094-1103.
Robbins, D. L., Fein, D., Barton, M. L., & Green, J. A. (2001). The Modified Checklist for Autism in
Toddlers: An initial study investigating the early detection of autism and pervasive
developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 31, 131-144.
Rutter, M., Bailey, A., Lord, C., & Berument, S. K. (2003). Social Communication Questionnaire.
Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Saemundsen, E., Magnússon, P., Smári, J., & Sigurdardóttir, S. (2003). Autism Diagnostic
Interview-Revised and the Childhood Autism Rating Scale: Convergence and discrepancy
in diagnosing autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 33(3), 319-328.
Scambler, D. J., Hepburn, S. L., & Rogers, S. J. (2006). A two-year follow-up on risk status
identified by the Checklist for Autism in Toddlers. Developmental and Behavioral
Pediatrics, 27(2), S104-S110.
Scambler, D., Rogers, S. J., & Wehner, E. A. (2001). Can the checklist for autism in toddlers
differentiate young children with autism from those with developmental delays? Journal
of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(12), 1457-1463.
Schopler, E., Reichler, R. J., & Renner, B. R. (1988). The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS). Los
Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Scott, F. J., Baron-Cohen, S., Bolton, P., & Brayne, C. (2002). The CAST (Childhood Asperger
Syndrome Test): Preliminary development of a UK screen for mainstream primary-
school-age children. Autism, 6(1) 9-31.
Siegel, B. (2004). PDDST-II Pervasive Developmental Disorders Screening Test-II. San Antonio, TX:
Harcourt Assessment.
Stella, J., Mundy, P., & Tuchman, R. (1999). Social and nonsocial factors in the Childhood Autism
Rating Scale. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29(4), 307-317.

Stone, W. L., Coonrod, E. E., & Ousley, O.Y. (2000). Screening tool for autism in two-year-olds
(STAT): Development and preliminary data. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 30, 607-612.
Stone, W. L., Coonrod, E. E., Turner, L. M., & Pozdol, S. L. (2004). Psychometric properties of the
STAT for early autism screening. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34(6),
691-701.
Swinkels, S. H., Dietz, C., van Daalen, E., Kerkhof, I. H., van Engeland, H., & Buitelaar, J. K. (2006).
Screening for autistic spectrum in children aged 14 to 15 months. I: The development of
the Early Screening of Autistic Traits questionnaire (ESAT). Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders, 36(6), 723-732.
Turner, L. M., Stone, W. L., Pozdol, S. L., & Coonrod, E. E. (2006). Follow-up of children with
autism spectrum disorders from age 2 to age 9. Autism, 10, 257-279.
Ventola, P., Kleinman, J., Pandey, J., Barton, M., Allen, S., Green, J., Robins, D., & Fein, D. (2006).
Agreement among four diagnostic instruments for autism spectrum disorders in toddlers.
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36, 839-847.
Wakabayashi, A., Baron-Cohen, S., Uchiyama, T., Yoshida, Y., Tojo, Y., Kuroda, M., &
Wheelwright, S. (2007). The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ) Children’s Version in Japan:
A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 491-
500.
Wiggins, L. D., Bakeman, R., Adamson, L. B., & Robins, D. L. (2007). The utility of the Social
Communication Questionnaire in screening for autism in children referred for early
intervention. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22(1), 33-38.
Wiggins, L. D., & Robbins, D. L. (2008). Brief report: Excluding the ADI-R behavioral domain
improves diagnostic agreement in toddlers. Journal of Autism and Developmental
Disorders, 38, 972-976.
Williams, J., Scott, F., Stott, C., Allison, C., Bolton, P., Baron-Cohen, S., & Brayne, C. (2005). The
CAST (Childhood Asperger Syndrome Test): Test accuracy. Autism, 9(1), 45-68.
Wing, L., Leekam, L., Libby, S., Gould, J., & Larcombe, M. (2002). The Diagnostic Interview for
Social and Communication Disorders: Background, inter-rater reliability and clinical use.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 307-325.
Witwer, A. N., & Lecavalier, L. (2007). Autism screening tools: An evaluation of the Social
Communication Questionnaire and the Developmental Behavior Checklist-Autism
Screening Algorithm. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 32(3), 179-187.

World Health Organization. (1993). The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural
disorders. Diagnostic criteria for research. Geneva: Author.

Autism Screen and Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autism Screen and Assessment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Autism Screen and Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the critical areas to include in a developmental history?

What are the critical areas to include in a developmental history?

What are some autism screening and assessment tools mentioned?

What are some autism screening and assessment tools mentioned?

TARGET: Texas Guide for Effective Teaching

Autism Screenings and Assessments

Autism Screenings and Assessments

Did You Know?

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 1

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 2

Accurate screening and diagnosis/identification of autism spectrum disorders requires

ASPERGER SYNDROME DIAGNOSTIC SCALE (ASDS)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 3

AUTISM BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST (ABC)

AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW-REVISED (ADI-R)

AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC OBSERVATION SCHEDULE (ADOS)/AUTISM DIAGNOSTIC

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 4

AUTISM OBSERVATION SCALE FOR INFANTS (AOSI)

AUTISM SCREENING INSTRUMENT FOR EDUCATIONAL PLANNING-THIRD

• Autism Behavior Checklist: A questionnaire that is designed to assess characteristics of

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 5

• Prognosis of Learning Rate: Measures rate of learning

AUTISM-SPECTRUM QUOTIENT (AQ)

The AQ is a parent questionnaire designed to identify the presence of the characteristics of

AUTISM SPECTRUM SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE (ASSQ)

CHECKLIST FOR AUTISM IN TODDLERS (CHAT)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 6

CHILDHOOD ASPERGER SYNDROME TEST (CAST)

CHILDHOOD AUTISM RATING SCALE (CARS)

DEVELOPMENTAL BEHAVIOR CHECKLIST-AUTISM SCREENING ALGORITHM

The Development Behavior Checklist-Autism School Algorithm (DBC-ASA; Brereton, Tonge,

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 7

DEVELOPMENTAL CHECKLIST-EARLY SCREEN (DBC-ES)

DIAGNOSTIC INTERVIEW FOR SOCIAL AND COMMUNICATION DISORDERS

EARLY SCREENING OF AUTISTIC TRAITS (ESAT)

GILLIAM ASPERGER’S DISORDER SCALE (GADS)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 8

GILLIAM AUTISM RATING SCALE-SECOND EDITION (GARS-2)

KRUG ASPERGER’S DISORDER INDEX (KADI)

MODIFIED CHECKLIST FOR AUTISM IN TODDLERS (MCHAT)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 9

MONTEIRO INTERVIEW GUIDELINES FOR DIAGNOSING ASPERGER’S

PERVASIVE DEVELOPMENTAL DISORDERS SCREENING TEST-SECOND EDITION

SOCIAL COMMUNICATION QUESTIONNAIRE (SCQ)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 10

SOCIAL RESPONSIVENESS SCALE (SRS)

SCREENING TOOL FOR AUTISM IN TWO-YEAR-OLDS (STAT)

SOCIAL COMMUNICATION QUESTIONNAIRE (SCQ)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 11

SOCIAL RESPONSIVENESS SCALE (SRS)

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 12

Autism Spectrum Screening and Diagnostic/Identification Tools

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 13

Summary of Screening and Diagnostic/Identification Tools

Name of Tool Screening/ Age Range Method of Approx. Subscales Availability

*Asperger D 5-18 Parent/teacher/caregiver 10-15 min. Cognitive

Autism S 3 to 14 Subtest of the ASIEP-3 10-20 min. Sensory behavior

Autism D Over 2 Structured interview 1.5-2.5 hrs. Early development

Diagnostic 93 items in three functional Language and

Texas Statewide Leadership for Autism Training | March 2009 14