About

Walter M. Zahorodny, PHD, is an Associate Professor and Research Director of the NJ Autism Study at Rutgers New Jersey Medical School within the Department of Pediatrics. He provides comprehensive developmental, psychological, and neuropsychological assessments of children and adolescents, as well as individual psychotherapy for individuals and adolescents. His areas of interest include autism diagnostics and pediatric development. Dr. Zahorodny earned his PhD in 1988 from the New School for Social Research and his BA in 1978 from Rutgers University. His work involves enhancing ASD surveillance in New Jersey, conducted in concert with the CDC, contributing to public health efforts in autism spectrum disorder surveillance and research.

Research topics

• Psychiatry
• Medicine
• Gerontology
• Pediatrics
• Demography
• Environmental health
• Psychology

Selected publications

• Accelerating Autism Prevalence in California with Changepoint Circa Birth Years 2015–2016 and Divergence by County and Socioeconomic Indicators

  Preprints.org · 2026-03-27

  preprintOpen accessSenior author

  Background/Objectives: Assessment of recent trends in prevalence is important for understanding the biological, medical and social aspects of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Methods: County-level ASD prevalence was estimated using a 2025 age-resolved snapshot from the California Department of Developmental Services (DDS) covering birth years 1993-2020. Denominators were estimated from public school populations. Results: Prevalence increased among all race/ethnicity groups across this period, with an uptick in the rate of increase starting around birth year 2015-2016 in many low- and middle-income counties. Large differences in ASD prevalence occurred by race/ethnicity as well as county, with prevalence among black children doubling statewide between birth years 2014-2019 and reaching as high as 10% in Los Angeles County among 5-year-olds born in 2020. Comparison of ASD prevalence in San Diego County between DDS and the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) network (for which part of San Diego is used to represent California) suggests that DDS may only capture half of all ASD cases, on the more severely affected end of the autism spectrum. Within DDS, San Diego prevalence was about 20% higher than California prevalence statewide. DDS ASD prevalence and rate of change in prevalence were positively correlated to county Medicaid (Medi-Cal) fraction and negatively correlated to median household income for the period of sharpest increase after birth year 2014. Conclusions: The changepoint circa birth year 2015-2016, together with the correlations to socioeconomic indicators, may help guide the formulation of hypotheses to explain the accelerated increase in diagnosed ASD prevalence in California.

  PublisherDOI

• Mortality Among Youth and Young Adults With Autism Spectrum Disorder, Intellectual Disability, or Cerebral Palsy

  JAMA Pediatrics · 2026-02-09 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access

  Importance: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), intellectual disability (ID), and cerebral palsy (CP) are lifelong neurodevelopmental conditions accompanied by varying impairments. US mortality data for these groups are limited. Objective: To compare mortality and causes of death among a multisite cohort identified at age 8 years with ASD, ID, or CP with the general population through youth or young adulthood. Design, Setting, and Participants: Nine US sites identified 32 787 individuals who met case definitions for ASD, ID, and/or CP at age 8 years during active population-based cross-sectional surveillance conducted biennially from 2000 through 2016 by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network. Individuals were linked to death certificates through 2021. Cases with multiple conditions (18.9%) were included in each case group. General population data from the National Vital Statistics System were matched to ADDM Network sites and years of participation. Analyses were completed in 2024. Exposure(s): ASD, ID, or CP. Main Outcomes and Measures: Death and International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) causes from death certificate linkage. Results: There were 145 deaths among 23 393 people with ASD, 285 deaths among 14 031 people with ID, and 123 deaths among 1612 people with CP. Increased mortality compared with the general population was seen for ASD (hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 1.15-1.59), ID (HR, 4.35; 95% CI, 3.87-4.88), and CP (HR, 9.62; 95% CI, 8.06-11.48). Further stratified by sex and co-occurring ID, mortality for ASD was higher only for females with co-occurring ID (HR, 5.04; 95% CI,3.21-7.91) compared with females in the general population. The distribution of causes of death varied across groups. The most common underlying cause of death ICD-10 chapters were external causes of morbidity and mortality (V01-Y98) for the general population and ASD case group, and diseases of the nervous system (G00-G99) for CP and ID case groups. The only ICD-10 chapter hazard of death that was not elevated for ID and CP compared with the general population was external causes as underlying cause of death. Mortality from external causes was also not elevated as underlying or any cause of death for ASD. There were also notable subchapter mortality differences with important clinical and public health implications. Only 11% of those with ASD, 1% of those with ID, and 49% of those with CP had an ICD-10 code for the respective disability on their death certificate. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, individuals with ASD, ID, or CP experienced higher mortality from a range of causes compared with the general population in youth and young adulthood. Mortality among these groups is difficult to ascertain using death certificates alone, since ICD-10 codes for these disabilities were rarely listed. These findings can inform public health and health care strategies to understand and prevent health disparities and excess mortality associated with developmental disabilities.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Prevalence and Early Identification of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 4 and 8 Years — Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 16 Sites, United States, 2022

  MMWR Surveillance Summaries · 2025-04-15 · 492 citations

  articleOpen access

  Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2022. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network is an active surveillance program that estimates prevalence and characteristics of ASD and monitors timing of ASD identification among children aged 4 and 8 years. In 2022, a total of 16 sites (located in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee, Texas [two sites: Austin and Laredo], Utah, and Wisconsin) conducted surveillance for ASD among children aged 4 and 8 years and suspected ASD among children aged 4 years. Surveillance included children who lived in the surveillance area at any time during 2022. Children were classified as having ASD if they ever received 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in a comprehensive developmental evaluation, 2) autism special education eligibility, or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code in the 299 range or International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) code of F84.0, F84.3, F84.5, F84.8, or F84.9. Children aged 4 years were classified as having suspected ASD if they did not meet the case definition for ASD but had an evaluator's suspicion of ASD documented in a comprehensive developmental evaluation. Results: Among children aged 8 years in 2022, ASD prevalence was 32.2 per 1,000 children (one in 31) across the 16 sites, ranging from 9.7 in Texas (Laredo) to 53.1 in California. The overall observed prevalence estimate was similar to estimates calculated using Bayesian hierarchical and random effects models. ASD was 3.4 times as prevalent among boys (49.2) than girls (14.3). Overall, ASD prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic White (White) children (27.7) than among Asian or Pacific Islander (A/PI) (38.2), American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) (37.5), non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black) (36.6), Hispanic or Latino (Hispanic) (33.0), and multiracial children (31.9). No association was observed between ASD prevalence and neighborhood median household income (MHI) at 11 sites; higher ASD prevalence was associated with lower neighborhood MHI at five sites.Record abstraction was completed for 15 of the 16 sites for 8,613 children aged 8 years who met the ASD case definition. Of these 8,613 children, 68.4% had a documented diagnostic statement of ASD, 67.3% had a documented autism special education eligibility, and 68.9% had a documented ASD ICD-9 or ICD-10 code. All three elements of the ASD case definition were present for 34.6% of children aged 8 years with ASD.Among 5,292 (61.4% of 8,613) children aged 8 years with ASD with information on cognitive ability, 39.6% were classified as having an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability was present among 52.8% of Black, 50.0% of AI/AN, 43.9% of A/PI, 38.8% of Hispanic, 32.7% of White, and 31.2% of multiracial children with ASD. The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis was 47 months and ranged from 36 months in California to 69.5 months in Texas (Laredo).Cumulative incidence of ASD diagnosis or eligibility by age 48 months was higher among children born in 2018 (aged 4 years in 2022) than children born in 2014 (aged 8 years in 2022) at 13 of the 15 sites that were able to abstract records. Overall cumulative incidence of ASD diagnosis or eligibility by age 48 months was 1.7 times as high among those born in 2018 compared with those born in 2014 and ranged from 1.4 times as high in Arizona and Georgia to 3.1 times as high in Puerto Rico. Among children aged 4 years, for every 10 children meeting the case definition of ASD, one child met the definition of suspected ASD.Children with ASD who were born in 2018 had more evaluations and identification during ages 0-4 years than children with ASD who were born in 2014 during the 0-4 years age window, with an interruption in the pattern in early 2020 coinciding with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.Overall, 66.5% of children aged 8 years with ASD had a documented autism test. Use of autism tests varied widely across sites: 24.7% (New Jersey) to 93.5% (Puerto Rico) of children aged 8 years with ASD had a documented autism test in their records. The most common tests documented for children aged 8 years were the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Autism Spectrum Rating Scales, Childhood Autism Rating Scale, Gilliam Autism Rating Scale, and Social Responsiveness Scale. Interpretation: Prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years was higher in 2022 than previous years. ASD prevalence was higher among A/PI, Black, and Hispanic children aged 8 years than White children aged 8 years, continuing a pattern first observed in 2020. A/PI, Black, and Hispanic children aged 8 years with ASD were also more likely than White or multiracial children with ASD to have a co-occurring intellectual disability. Identification by age 48 months was higher among children born in 2018 compared with children born in 2014, suggesting increased early identification consistent with historical patterns. Public Health Action: Increased identification of autism, particularly among very young children and previously underidentified groups, underscores the increased demand and ongoing need for enhanced planning to provide equitable diagnostic, treatment, and support services for all children with ASD. The substantial variability in ASD identification across sites suggests opportunities to identify and implement successful strategies and practices in communities to ensure all children with ASD reach their potential.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Community testing practices for autism within the autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network

  Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology · 2024-03-26 · 6 citations

  articleOpen access

  BACKGROUND: No data exist at the population level on what tests are used to aid in the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder in community practice. OBJECTIVES: To describe autism spectrum disorder testing practices to inform autism spectrum disorder identification efforts. METHODS: Data are from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, a multi-site surveillance system reporting prevalence estimates and characteristics of 8-year-old children with autism spectrum disorder. Percentages of children with autism spectrum disorder who received any autism spectrum disorder test or a 'gold standard' test were calculated by site, sex, race, median household income, and intellectual ability status. Risk ratios were calculated to compare group differences. RESULTS: Of 5058 8-year-old children with autism spectrum disorder across 11 sites, 3236 (64.0%) had a record of any autism spectrum disorder test and 2136 (42.2%) had a 'gold standard' ADOS or ADI-R test. Overall, 115 children (2.3%) had both the ADOS and ADI-R in their records. Differences persisted across race, median household income, and intellectual ability status. Asian/Pacific Islander children had the highest percent receiving any ASD test (71.8%; other groups range: 57.4-66.0%) and White children had the highest percent receiving 'gold standard' tests (46.4%; other groups range: 35.6-43.2%). Children in low-income neighbourhoods had a lower percent of any test (62.5%) and 'gold standard' tests (39.4%) compared to medium (70.2% and 47.5%, respectively) and high (69.6% and 46.8%, respectively) income neighbourhoods. Children with intellectual disability had a lower percent of any ASD test (81.7%) and 'gold standard' tests (52.6%) compared to children without intellectual disability (84.0% and 57.6%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Autism spectrum disorder testing practices vary widely by site and differ by race and presence of co-occurring intellectual disability, suggesting opportunities to standardise and/or improve autism spectrum disorder identification practices.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Prevalence and Characteristics of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 8 Years — Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 2020

  MMWR Surveillance Summaries · 2023 · 2443 citations

  • Medicine
  • Gerontology
  • Demography

  Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2020. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance program that provides estimates of the prevalence of ASD among children aged 8 years. In 2020, there were 11 ADDM Network sites across the United States (Arizona, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Tennessee, Utah, and Wisconsin). To ascertain ASD among children aged 8 years, ADDM Network staff review and abstract developmental evaluations and records from community medical and educational service providers. A child met the case definition if their record documented 1) an ASD diagnostic statement in an evaluation, 2) a classification of ASD in special education, or 3) an ASD International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code. Results: For 2020, across all 11 ADDM sites, ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years ranged from 23.1 in Maryland to 44.9 in California. The overall ASD prevalence was 27.6 per 1,000 (one in 36) children aged 8 years and was 3.8 times as prevalent among boys as among girls (43.0 versus 11.4). Overall, ASD prevalence was lower among non-Hispanic White children (24.3) and children of two or more races (22.9) than among non-Hispanic Black or African American (Black), Hispanic, and non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Islander (A/PI) children (29.3, 31.6, and 33.4 respectively). ASD prevalence among non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native (AI/AN) children (26.5) was similar to that of other racial and ethnic groups. ASD prevalence was associated with lower household income at three sites, with no association at the other sites.Across sites, the ASD prevalence per 1,000 children aged 8 years based exclusively on documented ASD diagnostic statements was 20.6 (range = 17.1 in Wisconsin to 35.4 in California). Of the 6,245 children who met the ASD case definition, 74.7% had a documented diagnostic statement of ASD, 65.2% had a documented ASD special education classification, 71.6% had a documented ASD ICD code, and 37.4% had all three types of ASD indicators. The median age of earliest known ASD diagnosis was 49 months and ranged from 36 months in California to 59 months in Minnesota.Among the 4,165 (66.7%) children with ASD with information on cognitive ability, 37.9% were classified as having an intellectual disability. Intellectual disability was present among 50.8% of Black, 41.5% of A/PI, 37.8% of two or more races, 34.9% of Hispanic, 34.8% of AI/AN, and 31.8% of White children with ASD. Overall, children with intellectual disability had earlier median ages of ASD diagnosis (43 months) than those without intellectual disability (53 months). Interpretation: For 2020, one in 36 children aged 8 years (approximately 4% of boys and 1% of girls) was estimated to have ASD. These estimates are higher than previous ADDM Network estimates during 2000-2018. For the first time among children aged 8 years, the prevalence of ASD was lower among White children than among other racial and ethnic groups, reversing the direction of racial and ethnic differences in ASD prevalence observed in the past. Black children with ASD were still more likely than White children with ASD to have a co-occurring intellectual disability. Public Health Action: The continued increase among children identified with ASD, particularly among non-White children and girls, highlights the need for enhanced infrastructure to provide equitable diagnostic, treatment, and support services for all children with ASD. Similar to previous reporting periods, findings varied considerably across network sites, indicating the need for additional research to understand the nature of such differences and potentially apply successful identification strategies across states.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Early identification of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 4 years - Early autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, six sites, United States, 2016

  UNC Libraries · 2023-08-17 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access

  Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2016. Description of System: The Early Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (Early ADDM) Network, a subset of the overall ADDM Network, is an active surveillance program that estimates ASD prevalence and monitors early identification of ASD among children aged 4 years. Children included in surveillance year 2016 were born in 2012 and had a parent or guardian who lived in the surveillance area in Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, or Wisconsin, at any time during 2016. Children were identified from records of community sources including general pediatric health clinics, special education programs, and early intervention programs. Data from comprehensive evaluations performed by community professionals were abstracted and reviewed by trained clinicians using a standardized ASD surveillance case definition with criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Results: In 2016, the overall ASD prevalence was 15.6 per 1,000 (one in 64) children aged 4 years for Early ADDM Network sites. Prevalence varied from 8.8 per 1,000 in Missouri to 25.3 per 1,000 in New Jersey. At every site, prevalence was higher among boys than among girls, with an overall male-to-female prevalence ratio of 3.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.1-4.1). Prevalence of ASD between non-Hispanic white (white) and non-Hispanic black (black) children was similar at each site (overall prevalence ratio: 0.9; 95% CI = 0.8-1.1). The prevalence of ASD using DSM-5 criteria was lower than the prevalence using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria at one of four sites that used criteria from both editions. Among sites where ≥60% of children aged 4 years had information about intellectual disability (intelligence quotient ≤70 or examiner's statement of intellectual disability documented in an evaluation), 53% of children with ASD had co-occurring intellectual disability. Of all children aged 4 years with ASD, 84% had a first evaluation at age ≤36 months and 71% of children who met the surveillance case definition had a previous ASD diagnosis from a community provider. Median age at first evaluation and diagnosis for this age group was 26 months and 33 months, respectively. Cumulative incidence of autism diagnoses received by age 48 months was higher for children aged 4 years than for those aged 8 years identified in Early ADDM Network surveillance areas in 2016. Interpretation: In 2016, the overall prevalence of ASD in the Early ADDM Network using DSM-5 criteria (15.6 per 1,000 children aged 4 years) was higher than the 2014 estimate using DSM-5 criteria (14.1 per 1,000). Children born in 2012 had a higher cumulative incidence of ASD diagnoses by age 48 months compared with children born in 2008, which indicates more early identification of ASD in the younger group. The disparity in ASD prevalence has decreased between white and black children. Prevalence of co-occurring intellectual disability was higher than in 2014, suggesting children with intellectual disability continue to be identified at younger ages. More children received evaluations by age 36 months in 2016 than in 2014, which is consistent with Healthy People 2020 goals. Median age at earliest ASD diagnosis has not changed considerably since 2014. Public Health Action: More children aged 4 years with ASD are being evaluated by age 36 months and diagnosed by age 48 months, but there is still room for improvement in early identification. Timely evaluation of children by community providers as soon as developmental concerns have been identified might result in earlier ASD diagnoses, earlier receipt of evidence-based interventions, and improved developmental outcomes.

  PublisherDOI

• Prevalence and Characteristics of Autism Spectrum Disorder Among Children Aged 4 Years — Early Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, Seven Sites, United States, 2010, 2012, and 2014

  UNC Libraries · 2023-08-17

  articleOpen accessSenior author

  Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is estimated to affect up to 3% of children in the United States. Public health surveillance for ASD among children aged 4 years provides information about trends in prevalence, characteristics of children with ASD, and progress made toward decreasing the age of identification of ASD so that evidence-based interventions can begin as early as possible. Period Covered: 2010, 2012, and 2014. Description of System: The Early Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (Early ADDM) Network is an active surveillance system that provides biennial estimates of the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 4 years whose parents or guardians lived within designated sites. During surveillance years 2010, 2012, or 2014, data were collected in seven sites: Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin. The Early ADDM Network is a subset of the broader ADDM Network (which included 13 total sites over the same period) that has been conducting ASD surveillance among children aged 8 years since 2000. Each Early ADDM site covers a smaller geographic area than the broader ADDM Network. Early ADDM ASD surveillance is conducted in two phases using the same methods and project staff members as the ADDM Network. The first phase consists of reviewing and abstracting data from children’s records, including comprehensive evaluations performed by community professionals. Sources for these evaluations include general pediatric health clinics and specialized programs for children with developmental disabilities. In addition, special education records (for children aged ≥3 years) were reviewed for Arizona, Colorado, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Utah, and early intervention records (for children aged 0 to <3 years) were reviewed for New Jersey, North Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin; in Wisconsin, early intervention records were reviewed for 2014 only. The second phase involves a review of the abstracted evaluationsby trained clinicians using a standardized case definition and method. A child is considered to meet the surveillance case definition for ASD if one or more comprehensive evaluations of that child completed by a qualified professional describes behaviors consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnostic criteria for any of the following conditions: autistic disorder, pervasive developmental disorder–not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS, including atypical autism), or Asperger disorder (2010, 2012, and 2014). For 2014 only, prevalence estimates based on surveillance case definitions according to DSM-IV-TR and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) were compared. This report provides estimates of overall ASD prevalence and prevalence by sex and race/ethnicity; characteristics of children aged 4 years with ASD, including age at first developmental evaluation, age at ASD diagnosis, and cognitive function; and trends in ASD prevalence and characteristics among Early ADDM sites with data for all 3 surveillance years (2010, 2012, and 2014), including comparisons with children aged 8 years living in the same geographic area. Analyses of time trends in ASDprevalence are restricted to the three sites that contributed data for all 3 surveillance years with consistent data sources (Arizona, Missouri, and New Jersey). Results: The overall ASD prevalence was 13.4 per 1,000 children aged 4 years in 2010, 15.3 in 2012, and 17.0 in 2014 for Early ADDM sites with data for the specific years. ASD prevalence was determined using a surveillance case definition based on DSM-IV-TR. Within each surveillance year, ASD prevalence among children aged 4 years varied across surveillance sites and was lowest each year for Missouri (8.5, 8.1, and 9.6 per 1,000, for 2010, 2012, and 2014, respectively) and highest each year for New Jersey (19.7, 22.1, and 28.4 per 1,000, for the same years, respectively). Aggregated prevalence estimates were higher for sites that reviewed education and health care records than for sites that reviewed only health care records. Among all participating sites and years, ASD prevalence among children aged 4 years was consistently higher among boys than girls; prevalence ratios ranged from 2.6 (Arizona and Wisconsin in 2010) to 5.2 boys per one girl (Colorado in 2014). In 2010, ASD prevalence was higher among non-Hispanic white children than among Hispanic children in Arizona and non-Hispanic black children in Missouri; no other differences were observed by race/ethnicity. Among four sites with ≥60% data on cognitive test scores (Arizona, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Utah), the frequency of co-occurring intellectual disabilities was significantly higher among children aged 4 years than among those aged 8 years for each site in each surveillance year except Arizona in 2010. The percentage of children with ASD who had a first evaluation by age 36 months ranged from 48.8% in Missouri in 2012 to 88.9% in Wisconsin in 2014. The percentage of children with a previous ASD diagnosis from a community provider varied by site, ranging from 43.0% for Arizona in 2012 to 86.5% for Missouri in 2012. The median age at earliest known ASD diagnosis varied from 28 months in North Carolina in 2014 to 39.0 months in Missouri and Wisconsin in 2012. In 2014, the ASD prevalence based on the DSM-IV-TR case definition was 20% higher than the prevalence based on the DSM-5 (17.0 versus 14.1 per 1,000, respectively). Trends in ASD prevalence and characteristics among children aged 4 years during the study period were assessed for the three siteswith data for all 3 years and consistent data sources (Arizona, Missouri, and New Jersey) using the DSM-IV-TR case definition; prevalence was higher in 2014 than in 2010 among children aged 4 years in New Jersey and was stable in Arizona and Missouri. In Missouri, ASD prevalence was higher among children aged 8 years than among children aged 4 years. The percentage of children with ASD who had a comprehensive evaluation by age 36 months was stable in Arizona and Missouri and decreased in New Jersey. In the three sites, no change occurred in the age at earliest known ASD diagnosis during 2010–2014. Interpretation: The findings suggest that ASD prevalence among children aged 4 years was higher in 2014 than in 2010 in one site and remained stable in others. Among children with ASD, the frequency of cognitive impairment was higher among children aged 4 years than among those aged 8 years and suggests that surveillance at age 4 years might more often include children with more severe symptoms or those with co-occurring conditions such as intellectual disability. In the sites with data for all years and consistent data sources, no change in the age at earliest known ASD diagnosis was found, and children received their first developmental evaluation at the same or a later age in 2014 compared with 2010. Delays in the initiation of a first developmental evaluation might adversely affect children by delaying access to treatment and special services that can improve outcomes for children with ASD. Public Health Action: Efforts to increase awareness of ASD and improve the identification of ASD by community providers can facilitate early diagnosis of children with ASD. Heterogeneity of results across sites suggests that community-level differences in evaluation and diagnostic services as well as access to data sources might affect estimates of ASD prevalence and age of identification. Continuing improvements in providing developmental evaluations to children as soon as developmental concerns are identified might result in earlier ASD diagnoses and earlier receipt of services, which might improve developmental outcomes.

  PublisherDOI

• Prevalence and characteristics of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years - Autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2012

  UNC Libraries · 2023-08-17 · 5 citations

  articleOpen access

  Problem/Condition: Autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Period Covered: 2012. Description of System: The Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network is an active surveillance system that provides estimates of the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 8 years whose parents or guardians reside in 11 ADDM Network sites in the United States (Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina, Utah, and Wisconsin). Surveillance to determine ASD case status is conducted in two phases. The first phase consists of screening and abstracting comprehensive evaluations performed by professional service providers in the community. Data sources identified for record review are categorized as either 1) education source type, including developmental evaluations to determine eligibility for special education services or 2) health care source type, including diagnostic and developmental evaluations. The second phase involves the review of all abstracted evaluations by trained clinicians to determine ASD surveillance case status. A child meets the surveillance case definition for ASD if one or more comprehensive evaluations of that child completed by a qualified professional describes behaviors that are consistent with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision diagnostic criteria for any of the following conditions: autistic disorder, pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (including atypical autism), or Asperger disorder. This report provides ASD prevalence estimates for children aged 8 years living in catchment areas of the ADDM Network sites in 2012, overall and stratified by sex, race/ethnicity, and the type of source records (education and health records versus health records only). In addition, this report describes the proportion of children with ASD with a score consistent with intellectual disability on a standardized intellectual ability test, the age at which the earliest known comprehensive evaluation was performed, the proportion of children with a previous ASD diagnosis, the specific type of ASD diagnosis, and any special education eligibility classification. Results: For 2012, the combined estimated prevalence of ASD among the 11 ADDM Network sites was 14.6 per 1,000 (one in 68) children aged 8 years. Estimated prevalence was significantly higher among boys aged 8 years (23.6 per 1,000) than among girls aged 8 years (5.3 per 1,000). Estimated ASD prevalence was significantly higher among non-Hispanic white children aged 8 years (15.5 per 1,000) compared with non-Hispanic black children (13.2 per 1,000), and Hispanic (10.1 per 1,000) children aged 8 years. Estimated prevalence varied widely among the 11 ADDM Network sites, ranging from 8.2 per 1,000 children aged 8 years (in the area of the Maryland site where only health care records were reviewed) to 24.6 per 1,000 children aged 8 years (in New Jersey, where both education and health care records were reviewed). Estimated prevalence was higher in surveillance sites where education records and health records were reviewed compared with sites where health records only were reviewed (17.1 per 1,000 and 10.7 per 1,000 children aged 8 years, respectively; p<0.05). Among children identified with ASD by the ADDM Network, 82% had a previous ASD diagnosis or educational classification; this did not vary by sex or between non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic black children. A lower percentage of Hispanic children (78%) had a previous ASD diagnosis or classification compared with non- Hispanic white children (82%) and with non-Hispanic black children (84%). The median age at earliest known comprehensive evaluation was 40 months, and 43% of children had received an earliest known comprehensive evaluation by age 36 months. The percentage of children with an earliest known comprehensive evaluation by age 36 months was similar for boys and girls, but was higher for non-Hispanic white children (45%) compared with non-Hispanic black children (40%) and Hispanic children (39%). Interpretation: Overall estimated ASD prevalence was 14.6 per 1,000 children aged 8 years in the ADDM Network sites in 2012. The higher estimated prevalence among sites that reviewed both education and health records suggests the role of special education systems in providing comprehensive evaluations and services to children with developmental disabilities. Disparities by race/ethnicity in estimated ASD prevalence, particularly for Hispanic children, as well as disparities in the age of earliest comprehensive evaluation and presence of a previous ASD diagnosis or classification, suggest that access to treatment and services might be lacking or delayed for some children. Public Health Action: The ADDM Network will continue to monitor the prevalence and characteristics of ASD among children aged 8 years living in selected sites across the United States. Recommendations from the ADDM Network include enhancing strategies to 1) lower the age of first evaluation of ASD by community providers in accordance with the Healthy People 2020 goal that children with ASD are evaluated by age 36 months and begin receiving community-based support and services by age 48 months; 2) reduce disparities by race/ethnicity in identified ASD prevalence, the age of first comprehensive evaluation, and presence of a previous ASD diagnosis or classification; and 3) assess the effect on ASD prevalence of the revised ASD diagnostic criteria published in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.

  PublisherDOI

• The Prevalence and Characteristics of Children With Profound Autism, 15 Sites, United States, 2000-2016

  Public Health Reports · 2023-04-19 · 100 citations

  articleOpen access

  OBJECTIVES: Autism spectrum disorder (autism) is a heterogeneous condition that poses challenges in describing the needs of individuals with autism and making prognoses about future outcomes. We applied a newly proposed definition of profound autism to surveillance data to estimate the percentage of children with autism who have profound autism and describe their sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. METHODS: We analyzed population-based surveillance data from the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network for 20 135 children aged 8 years with autism during 2000-2016. Children were classified as having profound autism if they were nonverbal, were minimally verbal, or had an intelligence quotient <50. RESULTS: The percentage of 8-year-old children with profound autism among those with autism was 26.7%. Compared with children with non-profound autism, children with profound autism were more likely to be female, from racial and ethnic minority groups, of low socioeconomic status, born preterm or with low birth weight; have self-injurious behaviors; have seizure disorders; and have lower adaptive scores. In 2016, the prevalence of profound autism was 4.6 per 1000 8-year-olds. The prevalence ratio (PR) of profound autism was higher among non-Hispanic Asian/Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (PR = 1.55; 95 CI, 1.38-1.73), non-Hispanic Black (PR = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.67-1.86), and Hispanic (PR = 1.50; 95% CI, 0.88-1.26) children than among non-Hispanic White children. CONCLUSIONS: As the population of children with autism continues to change, describing and quantifying the population with profound autism is important for planning. Policies and programs could consider the needs of people with profound autism across the life span to ensure their needs are met.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Prevalence and Disparities in the Detection of Autism Without Intellectual Disability

  PEDIATRICS · 2023-01-26 · 88 citations

  articleSenior author

  BACKGROUND: Intellectual ability predicts functional outcomes for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). It is essential to classify ASD children with and without intellectual disability (ID) to aid etiological research, provide services, and inform evidence-based educational and health planning. METHODS: Using a cross-sectional study design, data from 2000 to 2016 active ASD surveillance among 8-year-olds residing in the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan Area were analyzed to determine ASD prevalence with and without ID. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to identify trends for ASD with ID (ASD-I) and without ID (ASD-N). RESULTS: Overall, 4661 8-year-olds were identified with ASD. Those that were ASI-I were 1505 (32.3%) and 2764 (59.3%) were ASD-N. Males were 3794 (81.4%), 946 (20.3%) were non-Hispanic Black (Black), 1230 (26.4%) were Hispanic, and 2114 (45.4%) were non-Hispanic white (white). We observed 2-fold and 5-fold increases in the prevalence of ASD-I and ASD-N, respectively, from 2000-2016. Black children were 30% less likely to be identified with ASD-N compared with white children. Children residing in affluent areas were 80% more likely to be identified with ASD-N compared with children in underserved areas. A greater proportion of children with ASD-I resided in vulnerable areas compared with children with ASD-N. Males had higher prevalence compared with females regardless of ID status; however, male-to-female ratios were slightly lower among ASD-I compared with ASD-N cases. CONCLUSIONS: One-in-3 children with ASD had ID. Disparities in the identification of ASD without ID were observed among Black and Hispanic children as well as among children residing in underserved areas.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Josephine Shenouda

  Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

  52 shared

• Maureen S. Durkin

  University of Wisconsin–Madison

  37 shared

• Sydney Pettygrove

  University of Arizona

  30 shared

• Deborah A. Bilder

  Huntsman Cancer Institute

  26 shared

• Richard Marshall

  European CanCer Organisation

  26 shared

• Matthew J. Maenner

  National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities

  24 shared

• Kelly Shaw

  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

  24 shared

• Jon Baio

  Baidu (China)

  23 shared

Education

• Ph.D.

  New School for Social Research

  1988

• B.A.

  Rutgers University

  1978