Electrophysiological Measures of Listening-in-Noise With and Without Remote Microphone System Use in Autistic and Non-Autistic Youth.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the neural mechanisms by which remote microphone (RM) systems might lead to improved behavioral performance on listening-in-noise tasks in autistic and non-autistic youth. DESIGN: Cortical auditory evoked potentials (CAEPs) were recorded in autistic (n = 25) and non-autistic (n = 22) youth who were matched at the group level on chronological age ( M = 14.21 ± 3.39 years) and biological sex. Potentials were recorded during an active syllable identification task completed in quiet and in multi-talker babble noise with and without the use of an RM system. The effects of noise and RM system use on speech-sound-evoked P1-N1-P2 responses and the associations between the cortical responses and behavioral performance on syllable identification were examined. RESULTS: No group differences were observed for behavioral or CAEP measures of speech processing in quiet or in noise. In the combined sample, syllable identification in noise was less accurate and slower than in the quiet condition. The addition of the RM system to the noise condition restored accuracy, but not the response speed, to the levels observed in quiet. The CAEP analyses noted amplitude reductions and latency delays in the noise compared with the quiet condition. The RM system use increased the N1 amplitude as well as reduced and delayed the P2 response relative to the quiet and noise conditions. Exploratory brain-behavior correlations revealed that larger N1 amplitudes in the RM condition were associated with greater behavioral accuracy of syllable identification. Reduced N1 amplitude and accelerated P2 response were associated with shorter syllable identification response times when listening with the RM system. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that although listening-in-noise with an RM system might remain effortful, the improved signal to noise ratio facilitates attention to the sensory features of the stimuli and increases speech sound identification accuracy.

Empirically-Derived Effect Size Distributions of Interventions for Young Children on the Autism Spectrum.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to present a set of empirically derived effect size distributions to provide field-based benchmarks for interpreting the observed effects of interventions for young children on the autism spectrum, and for planning future studies. METHOD: We generated effect size distributions and reported quartile values for each by outcome domain, and by boundedness, proximity, and assessment approach using 1552 effect sizes from 144 early childhood autism intervention studies gathered for a previously published meta-analysis. RESULTS: Quartile values represent considerable heterogeneity in effect size distributions across outcome domains, as well as variability as a function of outcome boundedness, proximity, and assessment approach. CONCLUSIONS: Our results serve as field- and outcome-specific benchmarks (e.g., contextual guides for small, medium, and large effects) that will help autism intervention researchers easily incorporate information from relevant prior empirical literature when conducting power analyses to plan for future studies. Benchmarks will also assist researchers seeking to interpret the magnitude of observed effects in clinical trials relative to the broader distribution of intervention effects on similar outcomes. Nuanced discussions that contextualize study findings in light of relevant empirical benchmarks will better assist practitioners in understanding the magnitude and scope of demonstrated change relative to studies with similar outcomes and selecting interventions for clinical practice. We discuss the limitations of these data, our analyses, as well as directions for future work.

Remote Microphone Systems Can Improve Listening-in-Noise Accuracy and Listening Effort for Youth With Autism.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined whether remote microphone (RM) systems improved listening-in-noise performance in youth with autism. We explored effects of RM system use on both listening-in-noise accuracy and listening effort in a well-characterized sample of participants with autism. We hypothesized that listening-in-noise accuracy would be enhanced and listening effort reduced, on average, when participants used the RM system. Furthermore, we predicted that effects of RM system use on listening-in-noise accuracy and listening effort would vary according to participant characteristics. Specifically, we hypothesized that participants who were chronologically older, had greater nonverbal cognitive and language ability, displayed fewer features of autism, and presented with more typical sensory and multisensory profiles might exhibit greater benefits of RM system use than participants who were younger, had less nonverbal cognitive or language ability, displayed more features of autism, and presented with greater sensory and multisensory disruptions. DESIGN: We implemented a within-subjects design to investigate our hypotheses, wherein 32 youth with autism completed listening-in-noise testing with and without an RM system. Listening-in-noise accuracy and listening effort were evaluated simultaneously using a dual-task paradigm for stimuli varying in complexity (i.e., syllable-, word-, sentence-, and passage-level). In addition, several putative moderators of RM system effects (i.e., sensory and multisensory function, language, nonverbal cognition, and broader features of autism) on outcomes of interest were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, RM system use resulted in higher listening-in-noise accuracy in youth with autism compared with no RM system use. The observed benefits were all large in magnitude, although the benefits on average were greater for more complex stimuli (e.g., key words embedded in sentences) and relatively smaller for less complex stimuli (e.g., syllables). Notably, none of the putative moderators significantly influenced the effects of the RM system on listening-in-noise accuracy, indicating that RM system benefits did not vary according to any of the participant characteristics assessed. On average, RM system use did not have an effect on listening effort across all youth with autism compared with no RM system use but instead yielded effects that varied according to participant profile. Specifically, moderated effects indicated that RM system use was associated with increased listening effort for youth who had (a) average to below-average nonverbal cognitive ability, (b) below-average language ability, and (c) reduced audiovisual integration. RM system use was also associated with decreased listening effort for youth with very high nonverbal cognitive ability. CONCLUSIONS: This study extends prior work by showing that RM systems have the potential to boost listening-in-noise accuracy for youth with autism. However, this boost in accuracy was coupled with increased listening effort, as indexed by longer reaction times while using an RM system, for some youth with autism, perhaps suggesting greater engagement in the listening-in-noise tasks when using the RM system for youth who had lower cognitive abilities, were less linguistically able, and/or have difficulty integrating seen and heard speech. These findings have important implications for clinical practice, suggesting RM system use in classrooms could potentially improve listening-in-noise performance for some youth with autism.

Cortical Morphology in Autism: Findings from a Cortical Shape-Adaptive Approach to Local Gyrification Indexing.

It has been challenging to elucidate the differences in brain structure that underlie behavioral features of autism. Prior studies have begun to identify patterns of changes in autism across multiple structural indices, including cortical thickness, local gyrification, and sulcal depth. However, common approaches to local gyrification indexing used in prior studies have been limited by low spatial resolution relative to functional brain topography. In this study, we analyze the aforementioned structural indices, utilizing a new method of local gyrification indexing that quantifies this index adaptively in relation to specific sulci/gyri, improving interpretation with respect to functional organization. Our sample included n = 115 autistic and n = 254 neurotypical participants aged 5-54, and we investigated structural patterns by group, age, and autism-related behaviors. Differing structural patterns by group emerged in many regions, with age moderating group differences particularly in frontal and limbic regions. There were also several regions, particularly in sensory areas, in which one or more of the structural indices of interest either positively or negatively covaried with autism-related behaviors. Given the advantages of this approach, future studies may benefit from its application in hypothesis-driven examinations of specific brain regions and/or longitudinal studies to assess brain development in autism.

Research Review: Conflicts of Interest (COIs) in autism early intervention research - a meta-analysis of COI influences on intervention effects.

BACKGROUND: The presence, types, disclosure rates, and effects of conflicts of interest (COIs) on autism early intervention research have not previously been studied. The purpose of this study was to examine these issues. METHODS: This study is a secondary analysis of a comprehensive meta-analysis of all group-design, nonpharmacological early intervention autism research conducted between 1970 and 2018. We coded reports for the presence/absence of COI statements, the types of COIs that were disclosed, and for 8 types of COIs, including (a) the author developed the intervention, (b) the author is affiliated with a clinical provider, (c) the author is employed by a clinical provider, (d) the author is affiliated with an institution that trains others to use the intervention, (e) the author receives payment or royalties related to the intervention, (f) the study was funded by an intervention provider, (g) the study used a commercially available measure developed by the author, and (h) proceeds of the intervention fund the author's research. Frequencies and proportions were calculated to determine prevalence of COIs and COI disclosures. Meta-analysis was used to estimate summary effects by COI type and to determine if they were larger than for reports with no coded COIs. RESULTS: Seventy percent of reports were coded for ≥ 1 COI, but only ~ 6% of reports contained COI statements fully accounting for all coded COIs. Metaregressions did not detect significant influences of any COI type on summary effects; however, point estimates for each COI type were larger than for reports with no coded COIs. CONCLUSIONS: Conflicts of interest are prevalent but under-reported in autism early intervention research. Improved reporting practices are necessary for researcher transparency and would enable more robust examination of the effects of COIs on research outcomes.

Prevalence of Decreased Sound Tolerance (Hyperacusis) in Individuals With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Hyperacusis, defined as decreased tolerance to sound at levels that would not trouble most individuals, is frequently observed in individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Despite the functional impairment attributable to hyperacusis, little is known about its prevalence or natural history in the ASD population. The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis estimating the current and lifetime prevalence of hyperacusis in children, adolescents, and adults with ASD. By precisely estimating the burden of hyperacusis in the ASD population, the present study aims to enhance recognition of this particular symptom of ASD and highlight the need for additional research into the causes, prevention, and treatment of hyperacusis in persons on the spectrum. DESIGN: We searched PubMed and ProQuest to identify peer-reviewed articles published in English after January 1993. We additionally performed targeted searches of Google Scholar and the gray literature, including studies published through May 2020. Eligible studies included at least 20 individuals with diagnosed ASD of any age and reported data from which the proportion of ASD individuals with current and/or lifetime hyperacusis could be derived. To account for multiple prevalence estimates derived from the same samples, we utilized three-level Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses to estimate the current and lifetime prevalence of hyperacusis. Bayesian meta-regression was used to assess potential moderators of current hyperacusis prevalence. To reduce heterogeneity due to varying definitions of hyperacusis, we performed a sensitivity analysis on the subset of studies that ascertained hyperacusis status using the Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R), a structured parent interview. RESULTS: A total of 7783 nonduplicate articles were screened, of which 67 were included in the review and synthesis. Hyperacusis status was ascertained in multiple ways across studies, with 60 articles employing interviews or questionnaires and seven using behavioral observations or objective measures. The mean (range) age of samples in the included studies was 7.88 years (1.00 to 34.89 years). The meta-analysis of interview/questionnaire measures (k(3) = 103, nASD = 13,093) estimated the current and lifetime prevalence of hyperacusis in ASD to be 41.42% (95% CrI, 37.23 to 45.84%) and 60.58% (50.37 to 69.76%), respectively. A sensitivity analysis restricted to prevalence estimates derived from the ADI-R (k(3) = 25, nASD = 5028) produced similar values. The estimate of current hyperacusis prevalence using objective/observational measures (k(3) = 8, nASD = 488) was 27.30% (14.92 to 46.31%). Heterogeneity in the full sample of interview/questionnaire measures was substantial but not significantly explained by any tested moderator. However, prevalence increased sharply with increasing age in studies using the ADI-R (BF10 = 93.10, R2Het = 0.692). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, we found a high prevalence of current and lifetime hyperacusis in individuals with ASD, with a majority of individuals on the autism spectrum experiencing hyperacusis at some point in their lives. The high prevalence of hyperacusis in individuals with ASD across the lifespan highlights the need for further research on sound tolerance in this population and the development of services and/or interventions to reduce the burden of this common symptom.

Multisensory Integration as a Window into Orderly and Disrupted Cognition and Communication.

During our everyday lives, we are confronted with a vast amount of information from several sensory modalities. This multisensory information needs to be appropriately integrated for us to effectively engage with and learn from our world. Research carried out over the last half century has provided new insights into the way such multisensory processing improves human performance and perception; the neurophysiological foundations of multisensory function; the time course for its development; how multisensory abilities differ in clinical populations; and, most recently, the links between multisensory processing and cognitive abilities. This review summarizes the extant literature on multisensory function in typical and atypical circumstances, discusses the implications of the work carried out to date for theory and research, and points toward next steps for advancing the field.

Multisensory temporal integration in autism spectrum disorders.

The new DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) include sensory disturbances in addition to the well-established language, communication, and social deficits. One sensory disturbance seen in ASD is an impaired ability to integrate multisensory information into a unified percept. This may arise from an underlying impairment in which individuals with ASD have difficulty perceiving the temporal relationship between cross-modal inputs, an important cue for multisensory integration. Such impairments in multisensory processing may cascade into higher-level deficits, impairing day-to-day functioning on tasks, such as speech perception. To investigate multisensory temporal processing deficits in ASD and their links to speech processing, the current study mapped performance on a number of multisensory temporal tasks (with both simple and complex stimuli) onto the ability of individuals with ASD to perceptually bind audiovisual speech signals. High-functioning children with ASD were compared with a group of typically developing children. Performance on the multisensory temporal tasks varied with stimulus complexity for both groups; less precise temporal processing was observed with increasing stimulus complexity. Notably, individuals with ASD showed a speech-specific deficit in multisensory temporal processing. Most importantly, the strength of perceptual binding of audiovisual speech observed in individuals with ASD was strongly related to their low-level multisensory temporal processing abilities. Collectively, the results represent the first to illustrate links between multisensory temporal function and speech processing in ASD, strongly suggesting that deficits in low-level sensory processing may cascade into higher-order domains, such as language and communication.

How to Study the Influence of Intensity of Treatment on Generalized Skill and Knowledge Acquisition in Students with Disabilities.

Seven empirical studies from this special issue and an overview chapter are reviewed to illustrate several points about studying the possible effects of treatment intensity manipulations on generalized skill or knowledge acquisition in students with disabilities. First, we make a case in favor of studying intensity as separate from complexity and expense of treatment. Second, we encourage researchers to define dependent variables in a way that allows us to determine whether treatment intensity effects on child skills and knowledge are highly generalized versus potentially context bound. Third, we acknowledge that effects of treatment intensity on generalized knowledge and skills likely vary according to student characteristics. Finally, we discuss important research design and measurement issues that are relevant to isolating the likely conditional effects of treatment intensity on generalized outcomes.

Evidence-b(i)ased practice: Selective and inadequate reporting in early childhood autism intervention research.

LAY ABSTRACT: When researchers fail to report their findings or only report some of their findings, it can make it difficult for clinicians to provide effective intervention recommendations. However, no one has examined whether this is a problem in studies of early childhood autism interventions. We studied how researchers that study early childhood autism interventions report their findings. We found that most researchers did not register their studies when they were supposed to (before the start of the study), and that many researchers did not provide all of the needed information in the registration. We also found that researchers frequently did not publish their findings when their studies were complete. When we looked at published reports, we found that many of the studies did not report enough information, and that many studies were reported differently from their registrations, suggesting that researchers were selectively reporting positive outcomes and ignoring or misrepresenting less positive outcomes. Because we found so much evidence that researchers are failing to report their findings quickly and correctly, we suggested some practical changes to make it better.

Determining Associations Between Intervention Amount and Outcomes for Young Autistic Children: A Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Health professionals routinely recommend intensive interventions (ie, 20-40 hours per week) for autistic children. However, primary research backing this recommendation is sparse and plagued by methodological flaws. Objective: To examine whether different metrics of intervention amount are associated with intervention effects on any developmental domain for young autistic children. Data Sources: A large corpus of studies taken from a recent meta-analysis (with a search date of November 2021) of early interventions for autistic children. Study Selection: Studies were eligible if they reported a quasi-experimental or randomized clinical trial testing the effects of a nonpharmacological intervention on any outcome in participant samples comprising more than 50% autistic children 8 years or younger. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were independently extracted by multiple coders. Meta-regression models were constructed to determine whether each index of intervention amount was associated with effect sizes for each intervention type, while controlling for outcome domain, outcome proximity, age of participants, study design, and risk of detection bias. Data were analyzed from June 2023 to February 2024. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary predictor of interest was intervention amount, quantified using 3 different metrics (daily intensity, duration, and cumulative intensity). The primary outcomes of interest were gains in any developmental domain, quantified by Hedges g effect sizes. Results: A total of 144 studies including 9038 children (mean [SD] age, 49.3 [17.2] months; mean [SD] percent males, 82.6% [12.7%]) were included in this analysis. None of the meta-regression models evidenced a significant, positive association between any index of intervention amount and intervention effect size when considered within intervention type. Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this meta-analysis do not support the assertion that intervention effects increase with increasing amounts of intervention. Health professionals recommending interventions should be advised that there is little robust evidence supporting the provision of intensive intervention.

Diversity of Research Participant Gender, Race, and Ethnicity in Communication Sciences and Disorders: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association Publications in 2020.

Purpose: One manifestation of systemic inequities in communication sciences and disorders (CSD) is the chronic underreporting and underrepresentation of sex, gender, race, and ethnicity in research. The present study characterized recent demographic reporting practices and representation of participants across CSD research. Methods: We systematically reviewed and extracted key reporting and participant data from empirical studies conducted in the United States (US) with human participants published in the year 2020 in journals by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA; k = 407 articles comprising a total n = 80,058 research participants, search completed November 2021). Sex, gender, race, and ethnicity were operationalized per National Institutes of Health guidelines (National Institutes of Health, 2015a, 2015b). Results: Sex or gender was reported in 85.5% of included studies; race was reported in 33.7%; and ethnicity was reported in 13.8%. Sex and gender were clearly differentiated in 3.4% of relevant studies. Where reported, median proportions for race and ethnicity were significantly different from the US population, with underrepresentation noted for all non-White racial groups and Hispanic participants. Moreover, 64.7% of studies that reported sex or gender and 67.2% of studies that reported race or ethnicity did not consider these respective variables in analyses or discussion. Conclusion: At present, research published in ASHA journals frequently fails to report key demographic data summarizing the characteristics of participants. Moreover, apparent gaps in representation of minoritized racial and ethnic groups threaten the external validity of CSD research and broader health care equity endeavors in the US. Although our study is limited to a single year and publisher, our results point to several steps for readers that may bring greater accountability, consistency, and diversity to the discipline.

Measuring subjective quality of life in autistic adults with the PROMIS global-10: Psychometric study and development of an autism-specific scoring method.

LAY ABSTRACT: Quality of Life an outcome that both researchers and autistic advocates agree is extremely important to consider when implementing services, interventions, and supports for autistic people. However, there has been little research on the topic of how quality of life can best be measured in autistic people or whether existing quality of life questionnaires are appropriate for use in the autistic population. This study aimed to validate an established quality of life measure, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10, in a large sample of autistic adults recruited online. We created a new way to score the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10 scale and generate a "General quality of life" score specific to autistic adults. This new score performed very well in this sample, showing very little measurement error and relating in expected ways to similar constructs, such as physical health and emotional distress. Exploratory analyses found that lower quality of life was associated with female sex and self-identification as a sexual or gender minority (i.e. LGBTQ + identity). These findings suggest that the new Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global-10 quality of life score is a reliable and valid measure of quality of life in autistic adults, although additional studies are necessary to further explore its measurement properties in other subsets of the autistic population, such as individuals with intellectual disabilities. This measure is freely available for use as an outcome in both research and clinical practice, and an online score calculator is available to support the use of this measure in real-world applications.

Audiovisual multisensory integration in individuals with reading and language impairments: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Differences in sensory function have been documented for a number of neurodevelopmental conditions, including reading and language impairments. Prior studies have measured audiovisual multisensory integration (i.e., the ability to combine inputs from the auditory and visual modalities) in these populations. The present study sought to systematically review and quantitatively synthesize the extant literature on audiovisual multisensory integration in individuals with reading and language impairments. A comprehensive search strategy yielded 56 reports, of which 38 were used to extract 109 group difference and 68 correlational effect sizes. There was an overall difference between individuals with reading and language impairments and comparisons on audiovisual integration. There was a nonsignificant trend towards moderation according to sample type (i.e., reading versus language) and publication/small study bias for this model. Overall, there was a small but non-significant correlation between metrics of audiovisual integration and reading or language ability; this model was not moderated by sample or study characteristics, nor was there evidence of publication/small study bias. Limitations and future directions for primary and meta-analytic research are discussed.

Forwarding the Science of Sensory Features in Autism and Related Conditions.

This editorial accompanies the JADD Special Issue on Sensory Features in Autism and Related Conditions: Developmental Approaches, Mechanisms and Targeted Interventions. The editorial is a commentary on the state of the science in sensory features in autism and related conditions and provides a synopsis of the information contained in the special issue including provocative thoughts about moving the field forward in this area.

Neural Correlates of Audiovisual Speech Processing in Autistic and Non-Autistic Youth.

Autistic youth demonstrate differences in processing multisensory information, particularly in temporal processing of multisensory speech. Extensive research has identified several key brain regions for multisensory speech processing in non-autistic adults, including the superior temporal sulcus (STS) and insula, but it is unclear to what extent these regions are involved in temporal processing of multisensory speech in autistic youth. As a first step in exploring the neural substrates of multisensory temporal processing in this clinical population, we employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with a simultaneity-judgment audiovisual speech task. Eighteen autistic youth and a comparison group of 20 non-autistic youth matched on chronological age, biological sex, and gender participated. Results extend prior findings from studies of non-autistic adults, with non-autistic youth demonstrating responses in several similar regions as previously implicated in adult temporal processing of multisensory speech. Autistic youth demonstrated responses in fewer of the multisensory regions identified in adult studies; responses were limited to visual and motor cortices. Group responses in the middle temporal gyrus significantly interacted with age; younger autistic individuals showed reduced MTG responses whereas older individuals showed comparable MTG responses relative to non-autistic controls. Across groups, responses in the precuneus covaried with task accuracy, and anterior temporal and insula responses covaried with nonverbal IQ. These preliminary findings suggest possible differences in neural mechanisms of audiovisual processing in autistic youth while highlighting the need to consider participant characteristics in future, larger-scale studies exploring the neural basis of multisensory function in autism.

Associations Between Caregiver Stress and Language Outcomes in Infants With Autistic and Non-Autistic Siblings: An Exploratory Study.

PURPOSE: Caregivers of autistic children present with high stress levels, which have been associated with poorer child outcomes in several domains, including language development. However, prior to this study, it was unknown whether elevated caregiver stress was associated with language development in infant siblings of autistic children (Sibs-autism), who are at increased likelihood of receiving a future diagnosis of autism and/or language impairment compared to infant siblings of non-autistic children. This study explored the degree to which, as well as the mechanisms by which, caregiver stress was linked with later language outcomes of Sibs-autism and infant siblings of non-autistic children (Sibs-NA). METHOD: Participants were 50 infants (28 Sibs-autism; 22 Sibs-NA) aged 12-18 months at the first time point in this study (Time 1). Infants were seen again 9 months later, at 21-27 months of age (Time 2). Caregiver stress was measured via a validated self-report measure at Time 1. Caregiver language input, the putative mechanism by which caregiver stress may influence later language outcomes, was collected via two daylong recordings from digital recording (Language ENvironment Analysis) devices worn by the child at this same time point. Child language outcomes were measured via standardized and caregiver report measures at Time 2. RESULTS: Several models testing hypothesized indirect effects of caregiver stress on later child language outcomes through caregiver language input were statistically significant. Specifically, significant indirect effects suggest that (a) caregivers with increased stress tend to speak less to their infants, and (b) this reduced language input tends to covary with reduced child language outcomes later in life for Sibs-autism and Sibs-NA. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new insights into links between caregiver stress, caregiver language input, and language outcomes in Sibs-autism and Sibs-NA. Further work is necessary to understand how to best support caregivers and optimize the language learning environments for infants. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.21714368.

The Stability and Validity of Automated Indices of Vocal Development in Infants With Autistic and Non-Autistic Siblings.

PURPOSE: This study evaluates the extent to which automated indices of vocal development are stable and valid for predicting language in infants at increased familial likelihood for autism and/or language impairment and relatively lower likelihood infants. METHOD: A group of infants with autistic siblings (Sibs-autism; 20 infants) and a comparison group of infants with non-autistic siblings (Sibs-NA; 20 infants) wore Language ENvironment Analysis (LENA) recording devices for 16 hr on 2 days within a 1-week period. Extant software was used to derive several putative indices of vocal development from these recordings. Stability of these variables was examined across and within groups. Expressive and receptive language aggregates were calculated for each participant. Multiple regression analyses were used to (a) evaluate zero-order correlations for variables derived from LENA recordings with concurrent and future language and (b) test whether those associations were moderated by group status. RESULTS: Both stability and validity differed by variable and group status. All variables reached acceptable stability in the Sibs-autism group within two to three observations, whereas stability of most variables was attenuated in the Sibs-NA group. No variables were associated with concurrent language in the theoretically motivated direction across groups, but two variables were strongly associated with concurrent expressive language in only the Sibs-NA group. Additionally, two variables were associated with later expressive language, though these correlations were again stronger in the Sibs-NA versus Sibs-autism group. CONCLUSIONS: Although selected automated indices of vocal development were stable in Sibs-autism and/or valid for predicting expressive language within Sibs-NA, no scores showed strong, theoretically motivated associations with language within the Sibs-autism group. Automated indices of vocal development may, thus, have limited validity or clinical utility for predicting language development in infants at elevated familial likelihood for autism. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL: https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.24415735.

A Comparison of Listening Skills of Autistic and Non-Autistic Youth While Using and Not Using Remote Microphone Systems.

OBJECTIVES: The purposes of this study were to compare (a) listening-in-noise (accuracy and effort) and (b) remote microphone (RM) system benefits between autistic and non-autistic youth. DESIGN: Groups of autistic and non-autistic youth that were matched on chronological age and biological sex completed listening-in-noise testing when wearing and not wearing an RM system. Listening-in-noise accuracy and listening effort were evaluated simultaneously using a dual-task paradigm for stimuli varying in type (syllables, words, sentences, and passages). Several putative moderators of RM system effects on outcomes of interest were also evaluated. RESULTS: Autistic youth outperformed non-autistic youth in some conditions on listening-in-noise accuracy; listening effort between the two groups was not significantly different. RM system use resulted in listening-in-noise accuracy improvements that were nonsignificantly different across groups. Benefits of listening-in-noise accuracy were all large in magnitude. RM system use did not have an effect on listening effort for either group. None of the putative moderators yielded effects of the RM system on listening-in-noise accuracy or effort for non-autistic youth that were significant and interpretable, indicating that RM system benefits did not vary according to any of the participant characteristics assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expectations, autistic youth did not demonstrate listening-in-noise deficits compared to non-autistic youth. Both autistic and non-autistic youth appear to experience RM system benefits marked by large gains in listening-in-noise performance. Thus, the use of this technology in educational and other noisy settings where speech perception needs enhancement might be beneficial for both groups of children.

Autism intervention meta-analysis of early childhood studies (Project AIM): updated systematic review and secondary analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the breadth and quality of evidence supporting commonly recommended early childhood autism interventions and their estimated effects on developmental outcomes. DESIGN: Updated systematic review and meta-analysis (autism intervention meta-analysis; Project AIM). DATA SOURCES: A search was conducted in November 2021 (updating a search done in November 2017) of the following databases and registers: Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with full text, Education Source, Educational Administration Abstracts, ERIC, Medline, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, PsycINFO, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and SocINDEX with full text, Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Any controlled group study testing the effects of any non-pharmacological intervention on any outcome in young autistic children younger than 8 years. REVIEW METHODS: Newly identified studies were integrated into the previous dataset and were coded for participant, intervention, and outcome characteristics. Interventions were categorized by type of approach (such as behavioral, developmental, naturalistic developmental behavioral intervention, and technology based), and outcomes were categorized by domain (such as social communication, adaptive behavior, play, and language). Risks of bias were evaluated following guidance from Cochrane. Effects were estimated for all intervention and outcome types with sufficient contributing data, stratified by risk of bias, using robust variance estimation to account for intercorrelation of effects within studies and subgroups. RESULTS: The search yielded 289 reports of 252 studies, representing 13 304 participants and effects for 3291 outcomes. When contributing effects were restricted to those from randomized controlled trials, significant summary effects were estimated for behavioral interventions on social emotional or challenging behavior outcomes (Hedges' g=0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 1.06; P=0.02), developmental interventions on social communication (0.28, 0.12 to 0.44; P=0.003); naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on adaptive behavior (0.23, 0.02 to 0.43; P=0.03), language (0.16, 0.01 to 0.31; P=0.04), play (0.19, 0.02 to 0.36; P=0.03), social communication (0.35, 0.23 to 0.47; P<0.001), and measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.38, 0.17 to 0.59; P=0.002); and technology based interventions on social communication (0.33, 0.02 to 0.64; P=0.04) and social emotional or challenging behavior outcomes (0.57, 0.04 to 1.09; P=0.04). When effects were further restricted to exclude caregiver or teacher report outcomes, significant effects were estimated only for developmental interventions on social communication (0.31, 0.13 to 0.49; P=0.003) and naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on social communication (0.36, 0.23 to 0.49; P<0.001) and measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.44, 0.20 to 0.68; P=0.002). When effects were then restricted to exclude those at high risk of detection bias, only one significant summary effect was estimated-naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions on measures of diagnostic characteristics of autism (0.30, 0.03 to 0.57; P=0.03). Adverse events were poorly monitored, but possibly common. CONCLUSION: The available evidence on interventions to support young autistic children has approximately doubled in four years. Some evidence from randomized controlled trials shows that behavioral interventions improve caregiver perception of challenging behavior and child social emotional functioning, and that technology based interventions support proximal improvements in specific social communication and social emotional skills. Evidence also shows that developmental interventions improve social communication in interactions with caregivers, and naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions improve core challenges associated with autism, particularly difficulties with social communication. However, potential benefits of these interventions cannot be weighed against the potential for adverse effects owing to inadequate monitoring and reporting.