Acceptability and feasibility of a parent-mediated social-communication therapy for young autistic children in Brazil: A qualitative implementation study of Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy.

LAY ABSTRACT: Parents of autistic children and health professionals who work with autistic children in Brazil had positive views about introducing Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy as a therapy for autistic children in Brazil. The parents and clinicians also mentioned some difficulties about using Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy in Brazil. We made adaptations to Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy to address these difficulties. Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy is a therapy to support the development of social and communication skills for autistic children aged 2-10 years. The therapy is conducted with the autistic child's parent. Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy has not been used in Brazil before. There are few therapy options available for autistic children in Brazil and we believed that Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy may be useful. We asked three groups of people in Brazil about their views of Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy, after explaining how the therapy works. Group 1 included 18 parents of autistic children aged 2-10 years. Group 2 included 20 health professionals such as psychologists who work with autistic children. Group 3 included 15 parents of autistic children aged 2-7 years who received the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy. We learned that parents and clinicians felt that Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy would be a beneficial therapy for autistic children in Brazil. We also found out about the challenges of using Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy in Brazil. We used these findings to make small cultural adaptations to Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy to make it more suitable for Brazil.

A systematic review of observational, naturalistic, and neurophysiological outcome measures of nonpharmacological interventions for autism

Objective: Naturalistic and neurophysiological assessments are relevant as outcome measures in autism intervention trials because they provide, respectively, ecologically valid information about functioning and underlying neurocognitive mechanisms. We conducted a systematic review to highlight which specific neurophysiological techniques, experimental tasks, and naturalistic protocols have been used to assess neural and behavioral functioning in autism intervention studies. Methods: Studies were collected from four electronic databases between October 2019 and February 2020: MEDLINE (via PubMed), PsycINFO, LILACS, and Web of Science, and were included if they used structured observational, naturalistic, or neurophysiological measures to assess the efficacy of a nonpharmacological intervention for ASD. Results: Fourteen different measures were used by 64 studies, with the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule the most frequently used instrument. Thirty-seven different coding systems of naturalistic measures were used across 51 studies, most of which used different protocols. Twenty-four neurophysiological measures were used in 16 studies, with different experimental paradigms and neurophysiological components used across studies. Conclusions: Cross-study variability in assessing the outcomes of autism interventions may obscure comparisons and conclusions about how different behavioral interventions affect autistic social communication and underlying neurophysiological mechanisms.

A systematic review of observational, naturalistic, and neurophysiological outcome measures of nonpharmacological interventions for autism.

OBJECTIVE: Naturalistic and neurophysiological assessments are relevant as outcome measures in autism intervention trials because they provide, respectively, ecologically valid information about functioning and underlying neurocognitive mechanisms. We conducted a systematic review to highlight which specific neurophysiological techniques, experimental tasks, and naturalistic protocols have been used to assess neural and behavioral functioning in autism intervention studies. METHODS: Studies were collected from four electronic databases between October 2019 and February 2020: MEDLINE (via PubMed), PsycINFO, LILACS, and Web of Science, and were included if they used structured observational, naturalistic, or neurophysiological measures to assess the efficacy of a nonpharmacological intervention for ASD. RESULTS: Fourteen different measures were used by 64 studies, with the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule the most frequently used instrument. Thirty-seven different coding systems of naturalistic measures were used across 51 studies, most of which used different protocols. Twentyfour neurophysiological measures were used in 16 studies, with different experimental paradigms and neurophysiological components used across studies. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-study variability in assessing the outcomes of autism interventions may obscure comparisons and conclusions about how different behavioral interventions affect autistic social communication and underlying neurophysiological mechanisms.