Reduced hearing is associated with increased risk for social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties. Studies to date have typically compared DHH children with their hearing peers without regard for unilateral hearing loss (UHL) versus bilateral hearing loss (BHL). Children with UHL are often perceived as more like their typically hearing peers than their peers with BHL. Children with UHL typically access sound and spoken language which facilitates their functioning with fewer supports (e.g., interpreters, captioning). These children, however, show cognitive, academic, and communication profiles more similar to children with BHL than typically hearing peers. They may also experience similar social, emotional, and behavioral challenges as their BHL peers. We examined social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in a clinically referred sample of children with UHL versus BHL.

Parents of 100 children aged 2 to 17 years (M=7.12) with either UHL (n=30) or BHL (n=70) completed the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Third Edition (BASC-3) as part of neuropsychological evaluation in a Deaf and Hard of Hearing Program within a tertiary pediatric hospital. BASC-3 scores based on General Combined norms were compared to an expected distribution of typically developing hearing children using non-parametric one-sample tests. Profiles of scores for children with UHL and BHL were examined in a repeated measures MANOVA.

The groups of children with UHL and BHL showed similar age, gender, race, ethnicity, and Area Deprivation Index compositions. Eighty four percent of BHL children communicated with spoken language, and 100% of UHL children communicated with spoken language (p=.02). There were similar rates of comorbid diagnoses for ADHD (20%), Anxiety/Depression (18%), Autism Spectrum Disorder (8%), and Intellectual Disability/Global Developmental Delay (9%). However, children with BHL tended to be at greater risk for Language Disorders (50%) than those with UHL (30%, = 3.41 p=.065). Together, children with hearing loss showed significantly higher scores on the BASC-3 Hyperactivity, Aggression, Attention Problems, Atypicality, and Withdrawal clinical scales than expected (One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test; p<.01). Profile analysis showed that children with any type of hearing loss had a varied pattern of scores across scales (F(7,686)=4.33, p<.01), with highest scores on Hyperactivity and Attention Problems scales and lowest scores on Somatization. Scale profiles did not differ, however, between UHL and BHLgroups (p=.127).

Children with UHL have access to auditory input, typically enabling early language development more like their hearing peers compared to children with BHL. In turn, these children may be overlooked more so than their BHL peers. However, the likelihood of social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties is similar between the two groups of children with hearing loss, whether that is unilateral or bilateral. Our study showed both groups of children had similar profiles across BASC-3 scales with elevations relative to norms. Measuring these everyday functions in children with hearing loss is important for early detection of risks to promote early intervention.

Many studies supported that children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have worse executive functions (EFs) when compared to typically developmental (TD) children in many domains, such as planning, flexibility, inhibition, and self-monitoring. The current study aims to use an adapted version of the computerized tower test to investigate the EFs of children with ASD. Furthermore, the researcher also assessed children's EFs-related behaviors in their schools using a teacher-filled behavior rating inventory of executive function, 2nd edition (BRIEF-2).

61 Children aged 7 to 12 years old (M = 9.23) were included in the current study. 29 of them were in the ASD group, and 31 of them were in the TD group. All participants conducted an adapted computerized tower test. All participants' teachers completed BRIEF-2 to investigate their EFs-related behaviors in their schools.

The results indicated that there were no significant differences in the tower test between the ASD group and TD group in all indexes. Therefore, it implied that the current indexes might not be sensitive enough to distinguish whether a child has ASD or not. In addition, we further investigate the correlations between the tower test and the teacher-filled BRIEF-2. We found the different patterns in the two groups. In the ASD group, we found that the task-monitor index was positively correlated with total-number-of-rule-violations, total-complete-time, and total-rule-violations-per-item-ratio. The task-monitor index was negatively correlated with total-achievement-score, implying that poorer ability to monitor tasks leads to a longer completion time, more rule violations, and a lower total achievement score. Moreover, we also found a high correlation between the organization-of-materials in BRIEF-2 and total-complete-time in the tower test, suggesting the long problem-solving time in ASD groups is highly related to the disability of keeping working space ordered. In addition, we found that the shift index is positively correlated with total-complete-time and total-rule-violations-per-item-ratio. Hence, it indicates that those with poor flexibility in solving problems tend to need more time to complete tasks and violate more rules in ASD groups. In the TD group, we only found the correlation effects were significant between inhibition and self-monitor in the BRIEF-2 and the total-rule-violations-per-item-ratio in the tower test. It suggested that individuals with behavioral regulation problems, such as impulse control and monitoring problems are more likely to make rule violations. The result indicated that behavioral regulations play a more significant role in the TD group. In contrast, cognitive and emotional regulations are more critical in ASD children.

Our findings found no significant difference in the computerized tower test between children with and without ASD, suggesting that the current indexed might not be sensitive enough to differentiate children with or without ASD. However, the results of the correlation between the tower test and teacher-filled BRIEF-2 showed that different patterns might be the cause of the EF performances between the two groups, indicating that there might be a different domain of EFs the children used in the tower test between two groups.

Therefore, further research could focus on developing new indexes in the Tower test and finding the EF mechanism of ASD children with different approaches.

Infant motor development is a robust predictor of long-term developmental outcomes, especially in infants at high risk for neurodevelopmental impairments, such as those born preterm (PT, gestational age [GA] <37 weeks). Although direct assessments of motor development are available, they are infrequently applied by pediatricians in routine screening of the broader population of infants born preterm. Parent ratings, such as the Ages and Stages Questionnaire, 3rd Ed., can be used to screen for motor delays. However, this and other existing screening measures focus on whether children have reached milestones based on pre-established cutoffs, rather than on assessing development along a continuum of ability. The present study examined the validity of the Motor domain of the recently developed caregiver report screening tool, PediaTracTM, in distinguishing infants born PT from infants born full term (FT, GA ^37 weeks) across the first 6 months of life. The reliability and factor structure of this motor scale were also evaluated.

PediaTracTM is a web-based caregiver report assessing infant development across multiple domains, including motor functioning. This study reports on results from the PediaTracTM Motor domain for the study sample of 571 caregiver-infant dyads (240 PT, 331 FT). Caregivers rated their infants on age-targeted motor skills during the newborn period (NB, defined as term equivalent for the PT group) and at 2-, 4-, and 6-months after the NB period. Item Response Theory (IRT) methods were applied to assess the reliability (i.e., information) of caregiver-reported motor skills at each age. Using the IRT item parameters of discrimination and difficulty, items were selected for inclusion and to estimate theta, an index of the latent trait, motor ability, for each infant. Analyses conducted at each age assessed the effects of group, sex, and group x sex on the motor trait. Scale reliabilities and factor structure were also examined.

The PT group had significantly higher scores than the FT group on the motor trait at the NB period but significantly lower scores by 4 and 6 months, suggesting slower development of motor skills in the PT group. Means (SD) theta scores (similar to z scores) for the PT and FT groups, respectively, were .14 (.88) and -.05 (.91) for the NB period, -.01 (.90) and .01 (.91) for 2 months, .20 (.90) and .36 (88) for 4 months, and .46 (78) and .66 (.89) for 6 months. Effects for sex and group x sex interactions were not significant. Reliabilities, estimated at a point close to mean theta, were .94, .93, .96, and .98 at the NB, 2-, 4-, and 6-month periods, respectively. Exploratory factor analyses revealed evidence for a single primary motor factor and multiple second-order factors at each age.

Findings provide strong support for applications of the caregiver reported PediaTracTM motor scales in screening infants born PT and other at-risk populations for early delays or abnormalities in motor development. Advantages of this method include its ease of administration, sensitivity to developmental change, and promise in assessing subdomains of motor skill.

Rapid Onset Obesity with Hypoventilation, Hypothalamic Dysfunction, Autonomic Dysregulation (ROHHAD) is a rare and often progressive syndrome with unknown etiology and only 100 cases reported to date. The syndrome is characterized by generally normal development followed by rapid onset of pain, muscle weakness, personality changes, and developmental regression. Associated chronic pain and fatigue result in difficulty concentrating, slow information processing, and executive function challenges. Only one study has examined the neuropsychological profile of pediatric patients with this syndrome.

Our patient was a 10-year-old, right-handed male with a history of ROHHAD syndrome, focal epilepsy, mild neurocognitive disorder, autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) who underwent two comprehensive neuropsychological evaluations at our medical center.

Findings across multiple evaluations showed solid verbal skills and difficulty processing visual-spatial and nonverbal information, as well as problems with attention, executive functioning, and adaptive skills, and psychosocial functioning consistent with his diagnoses of ADHD and ASD. He exhibited fine-and gross-motor challenges associated with hypotonia. Chronic fatigue contributed to his challenges with attention and information processing. These findings are generally consistent with previous research examining the neuropsychological profile associated with ROHHAD syndrome.

Results from our case study highlight the complexity and challenges associated with ROHHAD syndrome. Consistent with available information, etiology of our patients’ neuropsychological weakness and functional decline is unclear. Yearly neuropsychological evaluations are recommended for these patients to update interventions based on their variable abilities. More research is needed to firmly establish the neuropsychological profile in youth of varying ages afflicted with this syndrome.

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many families face barriers in accessing critical services for their children. However, there is a disproportionate impact on families of children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders (NDDs), particularly those who are dependant on receiving regular services. The current study investigated how service delivery has changed for children and families with NDDs during the COVID-19 pandemic, to identify which groups are most at risk for service disruption and negative outcomes, and to provide actionable recommendations for community agencies that provide early interventions for future pandemics.

Data was collected in the fall and winter of 2020/2021 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Families were recruited from a local service provider in British Columbia whose Early Years Support services delivery model was changed to online delivery during the pandemic. Children had a diagnosis of NDD or were on the waitlist for an assessment. Overall, 26 families participated in a semi-structured interview that asked about their experiences of receiving services for their children during the pandemic. Of these families, 20 subsequently completed online questionnaires that asked about their parenting stress levels and their children’s behaviour throughout the pandemic. Families of a range of compositions were drawn from different ethnicities (30% white, 25% South Asian, 20% Filipino, and the remaining 5% identified as Indigenous, African or East Asian). The mean age of children was 3.80 years (SD =0.72).

From the survey, we found that 58% of parents reported higher than average levels of mental health and behavioural challenges in their children during the Covid-19 pandemic. In addition, 45% of parents reported higher than average parenting stress levels. Qualitative interview data indicated that most parents reported positive experiences with receiving services during the Covid-19 pandemic and reported feeling supported even with social distancing measures. However, families also reported increased stress levels and isolation, particularly those who have children with Autism Spectrum Disorder, who rely on early funding (06 years) and early services. One of the themes that emerged from parents who were on the waitlist to receive an assessment was that wait times around assessments were very long, which contributed to parent stress levels. Parents also reported concerns around wait times to access services and difficulty of accessing online services due to internet and connection issues.

The current study identified central themes of stressors and barriers experienced by families and children with NDDs in service delivery. Overall, parents reported satisfaction in changes in service delivery in most ways; however, they also reported stresses and barriers that included wait times, increased isolation, and accessing online services. Actionable steps to reduce family stress include better communication between service providers and families for wait times, and more variability in appointment times. Specific recommendations for current and future pandemics will be expanded on in the poster.

Motor skills have been linked to executive functions (EFs) in typically developing school-, and preschool-age children. Yet fine motor skills have been more consistently correlated with EFs than gross motor skills, perhaps because they are more frequently investigated. Preterm born children are vulnerable to deficits in both gross and fine motor skills, even after exclusion of neurological cases. In addition to motor skills, EFs may also be compromised in preterm born preschoolers. Because premature birth increases the odds for atypical brain development, and since adverse effects on brain functioning tend to yield increased dispersion of performance scores, we wished to determine whether fine and gross motor skills are differentially linked to performance on tasks measuring EF skills in nonhandicapped preschoolers born preterm.

We studied 99 preterm (born < 34 weeks) singleton preschoolers (3-4 years of age; 50 females), all graduates of the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI. Motor skills were assessed with the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales - (Second Edition) which provide Fine and Gross Motor Quotients (FMQ, and GMQ, respectively). Three core EFs were measured: working memory, motor inhibition, and verbal fluency. Working memory skills were assessed with two Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals - Preschool -Second Edition subtests: Recalling Sentences (RS) and Concepts and Following Directions (CFD). Motor inhibition and verbal fluency were assessed with the NEPSY-II Statue and Word Generation (WG) subtests, respectively. Children with a history of moderate to severe intracranial pathology or cerebral palsy were excluded.

We conducted linear regression analyses using scaled scores from the Statue, WG, RS, and CFD subtests as the predicted variables. Predictors of interest were the FMQ and GMQ. We adjusted for sociodemographic factors (SES and sex) and perinatal risk (gestational age, sum of antenatal complications and birth weight SD). The GMQ was significantly associated with all four EF measures (Statue, t(84) = 4.13, p < .001; CFD, t(92) = 3.83, p < .001; WG, t(84) = 3.38, p = .001; RS, t(90) = 3.37, p = .001). The FMQ was significantly associated with three of four EF measures (Statue, t(84) = 3.41, p = .001; CFD, t(92) = 3.97, p < .001; WG, t(84) = 1.96, p = .054; RS, t(90) = 2.91, p = .005).

Both fine and gross motor skills were associated with EF in nonhandicapped preterm-born singletons. Lower motor functioning in either motor domain was linked to reduction in performance on diverse EF measures. It should be emphasized that motor performance contributed to explaining variance in EFs even after statistical adjustment for early medical risk. In addition to the obvious conclusion that motor skills may underpin EF skills, it is likely that early risk factors not captured by the medical risk variables used in our analyses were nonetheless tapped by variability in motor performance. As preschool EFs are essential for subsequent academic performance, the significance of age-appropriate motor development in the preschool age should not be underestimated in our at-risk population.

Early childhood is recognized as a critical window of rapid cognitive development. Unfortunately, many risk factors for atypical cognitive development may occur during this period, including genetic syndromes, congenital neuroanatomical malformations, pre- or perinatal injury, and neurological and medical disorders. The impact of these risk factors on cognitive functioning may not always map onto patterns typically observed in adults. Limited literature exists on the presentation of cognitive profiles within clinical populations in the preschool developmental period. The present study aimed to evaluate whether discrete a priori cognitive profiles consistent with common neurobehavioral syndromes emerge and are distinguishable on testing in early childhood in a mixed clinical sample. We also aimed to determine if there was a consistent association between known medical risk factors and resultant cognitive profiles.

Participants included 163 children aged 1-5 years (M=48.5 months, SD=12.8 months) referred for neuropsychological evaluation. The sample was predominantly male (67.5%) and White (72.9%), followed by other/mixed race (11.6%), Black (9.7%), and Latino/Hispanic (5.8%). Cognitive abilities assessed included broad intellectual abilities, verbal abilities, nonverbal abilities, attention, and executive functioning. Continuous test scores were transformed into categorical ranges of performance, with scores classified as “above average,” “average,” “below average,” or “extremely low” to allow for profile classification. Theoretical clinical profiles consistent with common neurobehavioral syndromes were determined a priori by consensus among three authors (JK, AH, LM). Chi square tests of independence were conducted to compare membership across neurobehavioral diagnostic groups, clinical profile groups, and medical groups.

Based on cognitive data, 55.2% of the sample (n=90) was classified as Global Developmental Delay/Intellectual Disability, 19.6% (GDD/ID; n=32) was classified as

Language Disorder, and 18.4% (n=30) was classified as Typical Cognitive Development. 4.3% (n=7) of the sample was classified as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and 2.5% (n=4) was classified as Nondominant Hemisphere Dysfunction. As hypothesized, cognitive profile group membership was consistent with diagnostic impressions, as actual clinical diagnoses of Language Disorder, ADHD, GDD/ID, or a classification of typical cognitive development were significantly associated with theorized cognitive profile based on test performance alone (x2 (1,20) = 147.29, p < .001). Cognitive profile group membership was also significantly associated with referral source (1,28) = 62.88, p < .001) and the presence of a neurological disorder (1,4) = 14.64, p =.006).

Findings support the presence of specific theorized cognitive profiles in preschoolers in a mixed clinical sample. Specifically, GDD/ID, Language Disorder, and typical cognitive development are discrete and consistently distinguishable cognitive profiles in this age range. Early life neurological risk factors are also significantly related to cognitive profile membership, suggesting that these factors may be useful in predicting cognitive development even in very young children. Future work is needed to examine the consistency of these profiles over time and their predictive value in estimating subsequent development, and the possibility of discriminating unique cognitive profiles for specific medical conditions in preschoolers.