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.

Leveraging Communication Partner Speech to Automate Augmented Input for Children on the Autism Spectrum Who Are Minimally Verbal: Prototype Development and Preliminary Efficacy Investigation.

PURPOSE: Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) technology innovation is urgently needed to improve outcomes for children on the autism spectrum who are minimally verbal. One potential technology innovation is applying artificial intelligence (AI) to automate strategies such as augmented input to increase language learning opportunities while mitigating communication partner time and learning barriers. Innovation in AAC research and design methodology is also needed to empirically explore this and other applications of AI to AAC. The purpose of this report was to describe (a) the development of an AAC prototype using a design methodology new to AAC research and (b) a preliminary investigation of the efficacy of this potential new AAC capability. METHOD: The prototype was developed using a Wizard-of-Oz prototyping approach that allows for initial exploration of a new technology capability without the time and effort required for full-scale development. The preliminary investigation with three children on the autism spectrum who were minimally verbal used an adapted alternating treatment design to compare the effects of a Wizard-of-Oz prototype that provided automated augmented input (i.e., pairing color photos with speech) to a standard topic display (i.e., a grid display with line drawings) on visual attention, linguistic participation, and (for one participant) word learning during a circle activity. RESULTS: Preliminary investigation results were variable, but overall participants increased visual attention and linguistic participation when using the prototype. CONCLUSIONS: Wizard-of-Oz prototyping could be a valuable approach to spur much needed innovation in AAC. Further research into efficacy, reliability, validity, and attitudes is required to more comprehensively evaluate the use of AI to automate augmented input in AAC.

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.

Increasing linguistic and prelinguistic communication for social closeness during naturalistic AAC instruction with young children on the autism spectrum.

This study examined the effects of an intervention package using high-tech augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) with Naturalistic Instruction (NI), time delay, and prompting during social routines for preschoolers on the autism spectrum. The AAC was a communication application on a tablet programmed with color photo representations of participants and communication partners engaged in social routines. The primary dependent measure was a linguistic communication turn on the AAC device completing the instructor's cloze phrase related to the routine. A secondary dependent measure was prelinguistic communication -nonspecific vocalizations and smiling - within each turn of the routine. Results indicated that all communication types increased and maintained for all three participants with two participants meeting mastery criteria within the minimal number of sessions. These results are significant in providing additional evidence for the effectiveness of AAC intervention beyond teaching simple object requests and in teaching more socially meaningful communication to children on the autism spectrum. Additionally, this study supports the use of color photo representations to promote social interaction. Future research should continue to evaluate such interventions on a larger scale and include naturally occurring communication partners, such as siblings and peers.

Effects of Interaction Approaches and Added High-Tech Augmentative and Alternative Communication on Prelinguistic and Linguistic Communication from School-Age Beginning Communicators.

INTRODUCTION: Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) intervention research is rarely focused on school-age beginning communicators despite the urgent need to ensure individuals in this population have access to the fundamental human right of communication. METHOD: Four school-age children with multiple disabilities who were primarily prelinguistic communicators participated in the current study. The study used a single subject research design to explore the effects of two interaction approaches - a social routine approach and a directive approach - on prelinguistic communication, compared to independent play and to one another. This study then evaluated the added effects of high-tech AAC within the most effective interaction approach for each participant. RESULTS: All participants demonstrated prelinguistic communication indicating positive affect most frequently when interacting within a social routine. Furthermore, all participants increased linguistic communication while either maintaining or increasing prelinguistic communication when high-tech AAC was added to the social routine interaction. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Clinicians should consider building accessible, predictable, engaging, and age-respectful social routines into leisure contexts to promote prelinguistic communication from school-age beginning communicators. Clinicians should also provide access to linguistic communication through high-tech AAC while continuing to honor and promote prelinguistic communication.