Abstract Purpose of Review Since the term Tourettic OCD (TOCD) was first introduced, a growing body of research has investigated the ways in which chronic tic disorders like Tourette Syndrome (TS) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) overlap versus remain distinct. This brief review attempts to delineate findings across phenomenology and neurobiology as well as the implications results hold for TOCD assessment and treatment. Recent Findings Clinically, along with earlier age of onset and male predominance, the hallmark of TOCD is complex repetitive behaviors that blend premonitory sensations distinctive of tics with the “just right” anxious drives found in OCD. Neurobiologically, TOCD likely arises from dysfunction in the cortico-striato-thalamo-cortical (CSTC) circuits with neuroimaging indicating distinct but overlapping circuitry involvement compared to TS and OCD alone, adding credence to TOCD as a unique entity. Current assessment recommendations emphasize the flexible integration of established evidence based tools for TS and OCD with newer instruments that assess the range and purpose of sensory phenomena. Similarly, interventions for TOCD benefit from the blending of behavior and pharmaco-therapies for tics and OCD, with the goal of flexibly adapting techniques in an individualized manner. Summary Taken together, current research indicates a growing recognition of TOCD as a distinct disorder with unique clinical characteristics and neurobiology. Optimal assessment and treatment approaches are still being developed with current recommendations being multi-modal in nature. Future directions point towards work on establishing formal diagnostic criteria and specific and tailored assessment and treatment protocols for TOCD.

Abstract Purpose of Review The 2019 International clinical practice recommendations for developmental coordination disorder” recommended setting goals, and targeting interventions, at the activity and participation level. This review will explore how clinicians can make a positive move towards participation focused practice by measuring the impact of interventions at a participation level. Recent Findings Few studies have been published where the primary outcome measure is participation in activities which reflect child and family goals. The challenge of measuring the impact of participation focused interventions is setting goals and finding measures to capture both attendance and engagement from the child’s perspective. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) is frequently used to set goals and measure outcomes but does not consider levels of attendance and engagement. Summary Participation is a difficult construct to measure. There are tools available aimed at measuring participation, but they capture the parent/carer voice rather than the child’s. The recent publication of national survey studies on the impact of DCD provides valuable data in support of the development of participation focused services in multiple countries. Future research should continue to explore ways of capturing the child’s voice in measures of participation and continue to drive a better understanding of how participation focused practice can help mitigate some of secondary consequences reported in recent impact data.

Abstract Purpose of Review Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD/Dyspraxia) is a frequently overlooked and misunderstood neurodevelopmental disorder. Numerous studies have sought to index the rates of awareness of DCD and highlight a broad-spanning need for increased awareness to foster timely intervention and support for children with DCD. Therefore, we provide a semi-systematic review of studies that capture DCD awareness as well as a detailed discussion of pitfalls, successes, and future directions in raising awareness about DCD. Recent Findings Consistent with past research, recent evidence shows a broad-spanning lack of awareness among educators, parents and caregivers, clinicians and healthcare professionals. We provide an overview of these results and detailed discussion on the pitfalls, ongoing efforts, and productive future directions for raising DCD awareness. Summary Previous and recent efforts to promote DCD awareness have not yet reached their goal. Initiatives to improve knowledge transfer, training, resources, and research surrounding DCD must be continued in parallel with added efforts to connect to other fields, bridge resources and movements, and improve policy and funding opportunities in the field of DCD.

Purpose of the reviewThis review critiques Blanc’s Gestalt Language Processing (GLP) and Natural Language Acquisition (GLP/NLA), and related suggestions for clinical practice, from a linguistics angle.Recent findingsThis review extends a recent critique of GLP/NLA and brings to bear recent research on language acquisition in the general population and in autistic individuals. It also draws upon recent research on effective language teaching methods for minimally speaking autistic individuals, as well as the author’s own synthesis of evidence-based, autism-friendly instruction.SummaryIn light both of recent research and of earlier findings in the fields of autism and linguistics that are yet unconsidered in the context of GLP, I argue that those whom GLP/NLA proponents claim are “gestalt language processors” or “GLPs” necessarily engage in analytic, as opposed to gestalt, processes. I then explain why (a) the purported linguistic units in GLP—gestalts, defined as language that is echoed as analyzed stretches of speech sounds—are not plausible either as building blocks in language acquisition, or as full-fledged linguistic phenomena; and (b) that language acquisition, for all learners, is necessarily analytic, beginning in the earliest stages. Finally, I argue that some of the GLP/NLA suggestions for working with individuals proponents classify as “gestalt language processors” (also referred to reductively as “GLPs”) are detrimental to the autistic language learners that GLP/NLA proponents purport to be helping.

Purpose of ReviewExposure and Response Prevention (ERP), the gold standard psychosocial treatment for pediatric OCD, is severely underutilized in routine practice. The majority of youth in need do not receive ERP, with minoritized youth being even less likely to receive and benefit from ERP. Improving the equitable implementation of ERP is pivotal to improving outcomes for youth with OCD. This article examines determinants of equitable implementation and the efforts to date to improve ERP access and response across multiple levels of implementation context (e.g., clinician, innovation, societal).Recent FindingsDeterminants exist across contextual levels that inhibit or promote ERP access and response including lack of ERP cultural responsiveness, clinician training and attitudes, client stigma, therapeutic alliance, organizational supports, and workforce shortages. Most efforts have been focused on improving access through clinician training. Emerging work has also attempted to address both access and response through expanding the workforce capacity and improving the cultural responsiveness of ERP.SummaryThe review highlights the complex, multifactorial efforts required to achieve equitable access and treatment outcomes for youth with OCD. Our review suggests that there has been a disproportionate effort to date to improve ERP access and response by targeting clinicians directly; however, sustained change is unlikely unless policy and structural factors are addressed.

Purpose of ReviewThis review provides a critical overview of recent research on spelling and autism, highlighting developments and future research priorities.Recent FindingsIt has long been known that some children with autism have difficulty learning to spell. Recent studies have explored the reasons why these children have difficulty learning to spell and how they are best supported to learn to spell.SummarySpelling development has been linked to various factors in groups of autistic children, with language skills and intellectual functioning identified as key contributors to spelling achievement. Autistic and non-autistic children appear to draw on similar processes when spelling and may benefit from similar forms of instruction. Additional participatory research guided by autistic children, their parents and teachers is needed to further our understanding of spelling development and efficacious spelling instruction for autistic children. Potential avenues for future research are presented.