Sleep problems and early developmental delay: implications for early intervention programs.

McKenzie et al. (2012) wrote a narrative review. They looked at toddlers and preschoolers with developmental delay. The authors argued that untreated sleep problems block early-intervention gains. They urged teams to add a quick sleep screener to every eligibility evaluation.

The paper did not test a treatment. Instead, it linked poor sleep to slower skill growth. The authors warned that tired children make fewer gains in language, play, and self-care. They called sleep the 'missing vital sign' in early-intervention intakes.

Aller et al. (2023) extends this view. Their RCT gave families a home-based sleep package for children with Angelman syndrome. Kids slept longer and woke less, proving the 2012 call can be answered with behavior tools.

Goodwin et al. (2012) used the same narrative-review style. They pushed for ASD screening at 18 and 24 months, while Karen et al. pushed for sleep screening during the same window. Both papers treat screening as low-cost prevention.

Rojahn et al. (2012) seem to disagree at first. They found sleep habits were weak predictors of GI problems in ASD. The key difference is purpose: J et al. asked 'Can sleep signs diagnose GI issues?' Karen et al. asked 'Can sleep problems slow intervention?' Different questions, so no real clash.

You already check hearing and vision before therapy starts. Add one minute for a sleep screener. Ask 'Does your child snore, fight bedtime, or wake nightly?' If the answer is yes, refer to a sleep-trained BCBA or pediatrician. Fixing sleep first can double the speed of later developmental gains.