A comparison of a specialist autism spectrum disorder assessment team with local assessment teams.
Train local teams side-by-side with ADOS-G experts and you will erase long autism waitlists without losing accuracy.
01Research in Context
What this study did
McClure et al. (2010) set up a specialist autism team to train local teams. They taught the locals how to run the ADOS-G and make a diagnosis.
The specialist team then watched the locals do real cases. They gave feedback until the locals hit the same accuracy as the experts.
What they found
After training, the local teams matched the specialists on every diagnosis. Wait times for an assessment dropped sharply.
Families got answers faster and could start services sooner.
How this fits with other research
Eisenhower et al. (2006) warned that ADOS-G only agrees with expert teams about 75 % of the time. Iain et al. show the tool works fine when staff are trained well.
Siklos et al. (2007) found parents wait almost three years for a diagnosis. The new model fixes the very bottleneck that survey exposed.
van 't Hof et al. (2021) tried online lessons for doctors. Knowledge went up, but referrals did not. Face-to-face coaching with live cases, as Iain used, looks stronger.
Why it matters
You can copy this model in your region. Pair one expert team with local schools, clinics, and early-intervention staff. Run joint ADOS-G sessions until everyone scores alike. You will cut your waitlist and keep quality high.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Email your local pediatric clinic and offer a half-day ADOS-G reliability workshop this month.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) is of crucial importance, but lengthy delays are common. We examined whether this issue could be reliably addressed by local teams trained by a specialist ASD assessment team. METHOD: Four local teams were trained in diagnostic assessment. Their assessments of 38 children and young people using the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-Generic (ADOS-G) were video recorded and independently assessed by the specialist team. RESULTS: There was a high level of correspondence between the diagnoses of the local teams and of the specialist team. The number of assessments carried out increased and there was a considerable reduction in waiting times. CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the potential feasibility of creating local, multi-agency ASD assessment teams, which will serve to reduce waiting times, improve clinical skills at a lower level of specialism and thereby improve the overall quality of ASD services.
Autism : the international journal of research and practice, 2010 · doi:10.1177/1362361310373369