Research Article
Issue Date: January/February 2018
Published Online: December 01, 2017
Updated: April 30, 2020
Comparison of Two Tools to Assess Sensory Features in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder
Catherine Dugas; Marie-Noëlle Simard; Eric Fombonne; Mélanie Couture
Author Affiliations
  • Catherine Dugas, MSc, is Occupational Therapist, Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • Marie-Noëlle Simard, PhD, is Assistant Professor, School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and Researcher, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine Research Center, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • Eric Fombonne, MD, PhD, is Autism Research Director, Institute on Development and Disability, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland
  • Mélanie Couture, PhD, is Associate Professor, School of Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada, and Researcher, Axe Mère-Enfant, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de l’Université de Sherbrooke Research Center, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada; Melanie.M.Couture@usherbrooke.ca
Article Information
Autism/Autism Spectrum Disorder / Pediatric Evaluation and Intervention / Sensory Integration and Processing / Special Section: Research Articles
Research Article   |   December 01, 2017
Comparison of Two Tools to Assess Sensory Features in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, December 2017, Vol. 72, 7201195010. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.024604
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, December 2017, Vol. 72, 7201195010. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2018.024604
Abstract

OBJECTIVE. This article documents the convergent validity of the Sensory Profile (SP) and the Sensory Processing Measure (SPM)–Home Form for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

METHOD. Parents of 34 children with ASD between ages 5 and 8 yr filled out both measures. Through correlations, χ2 tests, and levels of agreement between classifications, the results for the SP and the SPM–Home Form were compared.

RESULTS. The raw scores were correlated for some sensory domains (hearing, vision, touch, and proprioception) and for social functioning. The classifications showed a significant level of agreement for most scales (κs = .247–.589, p ≤ .05) and for the total scores (κ = .324, p ≤ .01).

CONCLUSION. This study provides further evidence of convergent validity between both tools. The SPM–Home Form identifies more children with ASD who present with sensory features for every domain measured by both tools.