1. Dabrowska A, Pisula E. {{Parenting stress and coping styles in mothers and fathers of pre-school children with autism and Down syndrome}}. {J Intellect Disabil Res} (Feb 8)

Abstract Background The study examined the profile of stress in mothers and fathers of preschool children with autism, Down syndrome and typically developing children. A further aim was to assess the association between parenting stress and coping style. Methods A total of 162 parents were examined using Holroyd’s 66-item short form of Questionnaire of Resources and Stress for Families with Chronically Ill or Handicapped Members and the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations by Endler and Parker. Results and Conclusions The results indicated a higher level of stress in parents of children with autism. Additionally, an interaction effect was revealed between child diagnostic group and parent’s gender for two scales of parenting stress: dependency and management and limits of family opportunities. Mothers of children with autism scored higher than fathers in parental stress; no such differences were found in the group of parents of children with Down syndrome and typically developing children. It was also found that parents of children with autism differed from parents of typically developing children in social diversion coping. Emotion-oriented coping was the predictor for parental stress in the samples of parents of children with autism and Down syndrome, and task-oriented coping was the predictor of parental stress in the sample of parents of typically developing children. The results strongly supported earlier findings on parenting stress in parents of children with autism. They also shed interesting light on the relationship between coping styles and parental stress.

2. Ghaziuddin M. {{Brief Report: Should the DSM V Drop Asperger Syndrome?}}. {J Autism Dev Disord} (Feb 12)

The DSM IV defines Asperger syndrome (AS) as a pervasive developmental (autistic spectrum) disorder characterized by social deficits and rigid focused interests in the absence of language impairment and cognitive delay. Since its inclusion in the DSM-IV, there has been a dramatic increase in its recognition both in children and adults. However, because studies have generally failed to demonstrate a clear distinction between AS and autism, some researchers have called for its elimination from the forthcoming DSM V. This report argues for a modification of its diagnostic criteria and its continued retention in the diagnostic manual.

3. Jones AP, Frederickson N. {{Multi-Informant Predictors of Social Inclusion for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders Attending Mainstream School}}. {J Autism Dev Disord} (Feb 11)

This study examined differential profiles of behavioural characteristics predictive of successful inclusion in mainstream education for children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and comparison students. Multiple regression analyses using behavioural ratings from parents, teachers and peers found some evidence for differential profiles predicting peer acceptance and rejection. High levels of peer-rated shyness significantly predicted social rejection in comparison students only. Parent-rated prosocial behaviour also differentially predicted social acceptance; high-levels of prosocial behaviour predicted acceptance in comparison students, but low-levels were predictive for students with ASD. These findings suggest that schools may seek to augment traditional social skills programmes with awareness raising about ASD among mainstream pupils to utilise peers’ apparent willingness to discount characteristics such as ‘shyness’.

4. Kover ST, Abbeduto L. {{Expressive language in male adolescents with fragile X syndrome with and without comorbid autism}}. {J Intellect Disabil Res} (Feb 8)

Abstract Background Approximately one-quarter of individuals with fragile X syndrome (FXS) meet diagnostic criteria for autism; however, it is unclear whether individuals with comorbid FXS and autism are simply more severely affected than their peers with only FXS or whether they have qualitatively different profiles of behavioural impairments. To address this issue, variation in the FXS linguistic phenotype was examined in males with FXS with and without autism. The syndrome-specificity of the expressive language impairment of both groups of those with FXS was assessed in relation to Down syndrome. The extent to which different language sampling contexts affected expressive language in each diagnostic group was also examined. Method Spontaneous language samples were collected from male adolescents with FXS without autism (n = 20), comorbid FXS and autism (n = 8), and Down syndrome (n = 16). Syntactic complexity (indexed by mean length of utterance), expressive vocabulary (indexed by lexical diversity), talkativeness, fluency and intelligibility were assessed in two contexts: conversation and narration. Groups were matched on non-verbal IQ, non-verbal mental age and chronological age to allow the assessment of relative strengths and weaknesses across language variables. Results Males with comorbid FXS and autism were less intelligible than males with only FXS; no other differences between these two groups were found. Participants’ performance differed across contexts for syntactic complexity, lexical diversity, talkativeness and fluency. Conclusions These findings contribute to existing research on the behavioural profiles of individuals with FXS or FXS with autism who have low cognitive abilities. Although individuals with comorbid FXS and autism may be, as a group, more impaired than those with only FXS, data from this small sample of males with comorbid FXS and autism with low IQs suggest that their relative strengths and weaknesses in spontaneous expressive language are largely comparable and not differentially affected by the context in which their talk occurs.

5. Rommelse NN, Franke B, Geurts HM, Hartman CA, Buitelaar JK. {{Shared heritability of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder}}. {Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry} (Feb 11)

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are both highly heritable neurodevelopmental disorders. Evidence indicates both disorders co-occur with a high frequency, in 20-50% of children with ADHD meeting criteria for ASD and in 30-80% of ASD children meeting criteria for ADHD. This review will provide an overview on all available studies [family based, twin, candidate gene, linkage, and genome wide association (GWA) studies] shedding light on the role of shared genetic underpinnings of ADHD and ASD. It is concluded that family and twin studies do provide support for the hypothesis that ADHD and ASD originate from partly similar familial/genetic factors. Only a few candidate gene studies, linkage studies and GWA studies have specifically addressed this co-occurrence, pinpointing to some promising pleiotropic genes, loci and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), but the research field is in urgent need for better designed and powered studies to tackle this complex issue. We propose that future studies examining shared familial etiological factors for ADHD and ASD use a family-based design in which the same phenotypic (ADHD and ASD), candidate endophenotypic, and environmental measurements are obtained from all family members. Multivariate multi-level models are probably best suited for the statistical analysis.