Autism is most properly viewed as a continuum of disorders that have several features in common. There are several screening and diagnostic instruments now being utilized, but their usefulness to individual children may be limited, except as a way to place them on the autism spectrum. The importance of diagnostic tests is their ability to reliably identify children with autism spectrum disorders at the earliest age possible so that interventions can be started as soon as possible.

Conclusions:

• The committee assessed published reports of diagnosis, assessment, and prevalence and found that while clinicians could reliably diagnose children as falling within the spectrum, they could not necessarily pinpoint whether, for instance, a child had classical autism or atypical autism, PDD-NOS or Asperger’s Syndrome.
• There is little benefit to identifying narrow diagnoses (e.g., classical autism, atypical autism, PDD-NOS, or Asperger’s Syndrome), as it is not important to clinical or educational interventions.

Recommendations:

• that there be better education of clinicians about the importance of early identification of children with ASDs and that individual assessment of a child’s strengths and weaknesses should drive the choice of educational interventions, rather than a specific diagnosis.
• that after initial diagnosis of ASD, there be a follow-up assessment within 1 to 2 years to see if a specific diagnosis can be made.
• that a diagnosis of ASD should be sufficient to have a child deemed exceptional, without the need for a narrower diagnosis
• that a multidisciplinary assessment should be carried out to characterize an individual child’s strengths and weaknesses
• information about the hallmark features or symptoms of ASDs needs to be dissemination through professional organizations and through inclusion in curricula
• the Internet and other media should be used to promote early identification and intervention by providing accurate information about the symptoms that suggest the diagnosis of ASDs.