Psychometric Evaluation of the Short Sensory Profile in Youth with Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Zachary J Williams, Michelle D Failla, Katherine O Gotham and 2 others
PMID 30019274WHAT IT FOUND
In 388 children with autism, the Short Sensory Profile did not fit its usual subscale structure.
Only taste/smell, movement, and low energy scores held up. Its total score mixed several unrelated sensory behaviours and should not be treated as one sensory problem.
Key findings
01In 388 children with ASD, the SSP's original 7-factor and ASD 6-factor models both fit poorly, so the usual subscale scores should not be treated as measuring the sensory areas their names imply.
02The SSP total score was reliable, but only 68% of what it captured reflected one general sensory factor, so it should not be used as a single sensory score in ASD.
03The taste/smell subscale may be useful as a brief measure of food selectivity, but not of broad chemosensory hyperresponsiveness.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample was drawn mainly from children able to take part in research studies, and many were verbal, intellectually able, and behaviourally regulated, so results may not apply to more severely impaired children. The study included only children with ASD, so it cannot fully show that SSP scores mean the same thing as in typically developing children or that group comparisons are valid. Some factors in the best-fitting structure had too few items to be reliable or clinically useful. Sociodemographic information was incomplete, so racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic representativeness could not be judged. The authors did not evaluate the long-form Sensory Profile or fully test newer sensory questionnaires in ASD.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read a high SSP total score as evidence of one general sensory problem. The total score was reliable, but only 68% of what it captured reflected one general sensory factor, so most systematic variation came from separate sensory behaviours.