Since she's not speech delayed but you have nagging concerns, it might be Aspergers. These checklists might help. Good luck with everything.
Diagnostic checklists from the book "Parenting Your Asperger Child":
http://printables.familyeducation.com/forms-and-charts/skill -builder/51750.html - Part 1, Difficulty with Reciprocal Social Interactions
http://printables.familyeducation.com/forms-and-charts/skill -builder/51751.html - Part 2, Impairments in Language Skills
http://printables.familyeducation.com/forms-and-charts/skill -builder/51755.html - Part 3, Sensory Sensitivities
http://printables.familyeducation.com/forms-and-charts/skill -builder/51752.html - Part 4, Narrow range of interests and insistence on set routines
http://printables.familyeducation.com/forms-and-charts/skill -builder/51754.html - Part 5 - Cognitive Issues (including mind-blindness)
Hi uhn
i would ask for her to sit the A.D.O.S assessment
The Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule -Generic (ADOS-G) is a semi-structured assessment of communication, social interaction and play or imaginative use of materials for individuals suspected of having autism or other pervasive developmental disorders (PDD). It is a combination of two earlier instruments: the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS: Lord et al., 1989), a schedule intended for adults and children with language skills at a minimum of the three-year-old level, and the Pre-Linguistic Autism Diagnostic Observation Scale (PL-ADOS: DiLavore, Lord & Rutter, 1995), a schedule intended for children with limited or no language, as well as additional items developed for verbally fluent, high-functioning adolescents and adults. The ADOS-G consists of four modules, each of which is appropriate for children and adults of differing developmental and language levels, ranging from no expressive or receptive language to verbally fluent adults. These modules are described in separate sections following this introduction. They are labeled with numerals 1 to 4, with each activity numbered within its module.
The ADOS-G consists of standard activities that allow the examiner to observe the occurrence or non-occurrence of behaviors that have been identified as important to the diagnosis of autism and other pervasive developmental disorders across developmental levels and chronological ages. The examiner selects the module that is most appropriate for a particular child or adult on the basis of his/her expressive language level and chronological age. Structured activities and materials, and less structured interactions, provide standard contexts in which social, communicative and other behaviors relevant to pervasive developmental disorders are observed. Within each module, the participant's response to each activity is recorded. Overall ratings are made at the end of the schedule. These ratings can then be used to formulate a diagnosis through the use of a diagnostic algorithm for each module. In effect, the ADOS-G provides a 30 to 45 minute observation period during which the examiner presents the individual being assessed with numerous opportunities to exhibit behaviors of interest in the diagnosis of autism/PDD through standard 'presses' for communication and social interaction. 'Presses' consist of planned social occasions in which it has been determined in advance that a behavior of a particular type is likely to appear (Murray, 1938).
The modules provide social-communicative sequences that combine a series of unstructured and structured situations. Each situation provides a different combination of presses for particular social behaviors. Module 1, based on the PL-ADOS, is intended for individuals who do not consistently use phrase speech (defined as non-echoed. three-word utterances that sometimes involve a verb and that are the child's spontaneous, meaningful word combinations). Materials for Module 1 have been selected for young children, but materials from other modules may be substituted if desired. Module 2 is a combination of the ADOS and PL-ADOS and is intended for individuals with some phrase speech who are not verbally fluent. Module 3 is based on the ADOS and is intended for children for whom playing with toys is age- appropriate, (usually under 12 - 16 years of age) who are verbally fluent. Verbal fluency is broadly defined as having the expressive language of a typical four year-old child: producing 4. range of sentence types and grammatical forms, using language to provide information about events out of context and producing some logical connections within sentences ( e.g., "but" or "though"). There may be some continued grammatical errors. Module 4 includes the socioemotional questions of the ADOS as well as additional tasks and some interview items about daily living. It is intended for verbally fluent adolescents and adults. The difference between Modules 3 and 4 lies primarily in whether information about social-communication is more appropriately acquired during play or a conversational interview. The modules overlap in activities, but together contain a range of tasks from observing how a young child requests that the examiner continue blowing up a balloon in Module 1 to a conversation about social relationships at school or work in Module 4. Modules 1 and 2 will often be conducted while moving among different places around a room, reflecting the interests and activity levels of young children or children with very limited language; Modules 3 and 4 take place sitting at a table and involve more conversation and language without a physical context. Though the superficial appearance of the different modules is quite varied, the general principles involving the deliberate variation of the examiner's behavior using a hierarchy of structured and unstructured social behaviors are the same.
Because the focus of the ADOS-G is on observation of social behavior and communication, the goal of the activities is to provide interesting, standard contexts in which interactions occur. Standardization lies in the hierarchy of behavior employed by the examiner and the kinds of behaviors taken into account in each activity during the overall ratings. The activities serve to structure the interaction; they are not ends in themselves. The object is not to test specific cognitive abilities or other skills in the activities, but to have tasks that are sufficiently intriguing that the child or adult being assessed will want to participate. What the examiners do not do (such as deliberately waiting to see if the participant will initiate an interaction or try to maintain it) is often as important as what they do.
In general, each module should stand on its own in providing a range of tasks and social presses. However, an examiner may need to shift from one module to another if the language level of the individual is different than expected or, if for another reason, the tasks seem generally inappropriate. If in doubt, it is better to err in choosing a module that requires fewer language skills than an individual possesses than to risk confounding language difficulties with the social demands of the instrument. As is discussed later within the four modules, the order of tasks, pacing and materials can be varied, depending on the needs of the individual being assessed.
Many of the ratings made at the end of each schedule are similar across modules, with some identical items and some that are relevant only for a subset of modules. Separate algorithms for the different modules have been generated and are presented at the end of each section. Adequate inter-rater reliability for items has been established. However, this work has been carried out in small samples; thus, replication from independent samples will be very important.
In the following pages, the manual is organized around the four modules. Within each module, there is a general introduction, a description of tasks, a list of the materials needed and guidelines for overall ratings. Separate coding sheets contain the ratings and provide a recording form for notes made during each activity. These sheets include a summary of the purpose of each activity and the focus of observations targeted during each task. Notes should be taken during administration of each schedule. All modules, even if videotaped, should be rated immediately after they are administered. Earlier research with the PL-ADOS and ADOS showed that ratings of items made after live administration of the scales were equal or greater in reliability (and never less) than ratings from videotapes because the ratings involve social nuances of behavior that are not always observable or interpretable on a screen (such as distinguishing appropriate eye contact from looking over one's shoulder). Within a clinic or research group, examiners should obtain inter-rater reliability with each other before using the instruments for research. Our recommendation has been for 80 percent agreement on individual items and mean kappas greater than .60 (when sample sizes and distributions permit) for raters for three consecutive joint scorings.
The examiner needs to be sufficiently familiar with the ratings and the activities that she can focus her attention on observation of the individual being assessed, rather than on administration of the tasks. This requires practice in administering the activities, scoring, and observation. Notes need to be sufficiently detailed to be interpretable but not so lengthy that they interfere with administration.
The ADOS-G offers clinicians and researchers the opportunity to observe social behavior and communication in standardized, well-documented contexts. These contexts are defined in terms of the degree to which the examiner's behavior structures the individual participant's response and social initiative. For purposes of diagnosis, use of this instrument should be accompanied by information from other sources, particularly a detailed history from parents whenever possible (see Lord, Rutter & Le Couteur, 1994). Its goal is to provide standardized contexts in which to observe the social-communicative behaviors of individuals across the life span in order to aid in the diagnosis of autism and other pervasive developmental disorders. For this reason, it may not be a good measure of response to treatment or developmental gains especially in the later modules. On the other hand, some items have been deliberately included across several modules, even though they have diagnostic utility only in one (e.g., response to joint attention). It may be that developmental or treatment gains will be measurable using these items. An alternative strategy to measure absolute gains is to re-administer the same modules over time, as well as administering the developmentally appropriate module.
this test is very accurate
keep a diary write down all her behaviours and make sure you put that these behaviours are not jus when excited they tryed that ine with me.
keep a diary of any routines ,stereotyped behaviors and conversations to her self and others
video her on differant days and take it with you
but take your video camera to because there excuse will be they dont have a player to view your tape
dont just say i think my child is autistic
tell them your child is autistic
there are many tests and assessments that can be done
shell
Well she does sound like she has aspie or autistic traits, it's a spectrum disorder but there has to be a cut off point somewhere. It seems that your daughter has some traits but not enough to warrent a diagnosis. My older son had several dx before we finaly settled on pdd-nos at 5. it's difficult to dx the higher functioning kids but some of the borderline ones are easier to dx as they reach 5. I don't think the label means that much, it's the treatment that matters. If you feel that a diagnosis will entitle her to therapies that she needs then I'd have her reassesed. Even without a diagnosis you should be getting therapy like OT for her sensory issues. Good luck .
I decided to pull out my dd's past evaluations. I go through these phases where I believe she is fine and then sometimes I go back to wondering why she was not dx'd with asd.
I think the most confusing thing is the social part of the dx. I hear all the time that children with asd are social, engaged...etc. This is what kept doctors from giving her the label.
One report says that my dd displays stereotypical hand movements at times of excitement and was seen when she was playing with a toy. It also said she was preservating about a toy she left at a childs house but overall she had excellent eye contact, used long sentences and spoke freely to the examiner. He noted that she would sometimes mix up he and she and I reported that she calls herself "you" but he did not see any of this during the interview. At the end of the report it says "stereotypical movement disorder" and a "possible, subtle language disorder" and he wanted her further evaluated by a speech therapist. She was three at the time.
Another report, she just turned four, said she did not feel my dd was asd because "she entered the room and easily seperated from her mother. She went to see the toys and said "look Mom, they have puzzles!" The doctor felt this was joint attention and told me that children with asd usually do not share joint attention.
Now, here is my question...I remember my daugher commenting about the puzzles. I remember her saying "look MOM..." She does this ALL the time. She want to show me things she made...she wants me to see her favorite websites, shows on TV...etc. Is this really joint attention? Or is she just rambling? She does NOT look back at me to see if I am really looking back at her. She is goes on and on verbally about things.
I really think she is on the spectrum. I think she is mild and its very hard to see unless you know what to look for.
I am torn if I should still seek a dx or if I should wait it out and see if I "need" to if any problems come up in school.
She stims like crazy. She has only had one stim, the finger wiggling when she is excited, like watching something spin. Her language is NOT typical at all. She is very matter of fact, will talk all day if you let her but she only states the facts, she does not have the typical five year old back and fourth chatter. She is also very repetitive, we have a lot of the same questions/conversations. She is getting by though. Her school just evaluated her again for speech therapy, she was denied again because she is not "delayed." All her speech and language scores in the past have put her in the age appropriate range. I dont get it.
Socially, she can have friends. BUT, I think these little girls put a lot more effort in the relationship than she does. I worry she will start appearing weird though. She talks about strange things over and over...like birth stones and my name...her dad's name and her brothers names. Its odd. I wonder if she is being repetitive because of asd or if she really has no idea what to talk about so she brings up something familiar and comfortable.
Any advise? I am feeling crummy today, I have lots of fear again and I have no idea where its coming from...I hate these days.
My dd showed me things and easily separated during the exam. Our examiner, though, said her concern was more with dd's lack of interactions with her. In the first hour she only glanced at the examiner twice. During the IQ portion of the testing she was more engaged, but in her report she says," Interactions with her were sometimes comfortable but most often felt awkward and stilted."