Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders

Evidence Table. Therapies for children with ASD (continued)
Study
Inclusion/ Exclusion Baseline
Description Intervention
Criteria/ Population Measures Outcomes
Author:
Intervention:
Inclusion criteria: Social Skills: Social skills:
Beaumont et al., The Junior Detective • AS diagnosis confirmed SSQ score, parent SSQ score,
2008
Training Program: group by pediatrician rated, mean ± SD parent rated,
Country:
Australia
Practice
setting:
Academic
social skills training, • WISC-III pro-rated IQ
parent training, teacher score of ≥ 85
handouts and a computer • Age 7.5-11 years at
game
intake
2 hour training sessions
(range):
G1: 25.30 ± 7.43
(12-41)
G2: 23.16 ± 9.05
(7-44)
mean ± SD
(range):
G1: 38.08 ± 9.84
(15-55)
G2: 25.11 ± 7.91
Intervention for 7 consecutive weeks: Exclusion criteria: SSQ score, parent (7-42)
setting:
• Sessions 1 & 2: 1 hour • See inclusion criteria rated, follow-up G1/BL: P < 0.001
Clinic
training, 1 hour group Age: years ± SD (range): group, mean ± SD G2/BL: P = NS
Enrollment therapy and parent G1: 9.64 ± 1.21 (7.5-11.7) (range):
G1/G2: P < 0.05
period:
training
G2: 9.81 ± 1.26 (8.1-11.7) G1: 25.30 ± 7.43 SSQ score,
NR
• Sessions 3 & 4: 45 min Mental age:
(12-41)
parent rated,
Funding:
training, 75 min group WISC-III IQ, mean ± SD G2: 25.09 ± 7.34 follow-up group,
NR
therapy and parent (range):
(7-42)*
mean ± SD
Author industry training
G1: 107.15 ± 11.94 ERSSQ score, (range):
relationship • Sessions 5 & 6: little (85-130)
mean ± SD (range): Post-treatment:
disclosures: group therapy and G2: 107.43 ± 14.21 G1: 39.78 ± 10.17 G1: 38.08 ± 9.84
1 of 2
parent training (85-138)
(23-64)
(15-55)
The Junior • Session 7: 1 hour group Gender, n:
G2: 39.64 ± 12.52 G2: 41.50 ± 8.55
Detective Training therapy, 1 hour re- Male:
(17-64)
(29-58)*
Program (future assessment
G1: 23
ERSSQ score, G1/BL: P < 0.001
royalties) Provider:
G2: 21
follow-up group, G2/BL: P < 0.001
Design: • Chief investigator Female:
mean ± SD (range): 6 weeks:
RCT
• Two intern therapists G1: 3
G1: 39.78 ± 10.17 G1: 43.24 ± 8.81
enrolled in post- G2: 2
(23-64)
(24-58)
graduate clinical Race/ethnicity:
G2: 39.96 ± 10.27 G2: 39.96 ± 9.46
psychology and NR
(12-64)*
(22-59)*
counseling degrees SES:
Emotion
G1/BL: P < 0.001
Assessments:
Maternal education: NR Recognition: G2/BL: P < 0.001
Developmental history Household income: NR Assessment of 5 months:
questionnaire; CAST; Diagnostic approach: Perception of G1: 40.64 ± 12.85
SSQ parent and teacher Referral
Emotion score, (13-60)
forms; ERSSQ; WISC-III Diagnostic tool/method: mean ± SD (range): G2: 41.17 ± 8.48
short-form; Assessment of AS diagnosis confirmed by Facial expression: (28-58)*
Perception of Emotion pediatrician; parents G1: 17.44 ± 2.67 G1/BL: P < 0.001
from Facial Expression completed questionnaire (12-24)
G2/BL: P < 0.001
(Spence, 1995b); Assess- including diagnostic items G2: 18.30 ± 2.46 ERSSQ score,
ment of Perception of and CAST
(13-22)
mean ± SD
Emotion from Posture Diagnostic category, n Body posture: (range):
Cues (Spence, 1995c); (%):
G1: 20.48 ± 3.15 G1: 57.38 ± 13.40
James and the Maths Asperger Syndrome: 49 (14-24)
(32-80)
Test (Attwood, 2004a); (100)
G2: 20.96 ± 2.44 G2: 40.14 ± 10.69
Dylan is Being Teased Other characteristics: (16-24)
(12-64)
(Attwood, 2004b) CAST score, mean ± SD
G1/BL: P < 0.001
Groups:
(range):
G2/BL: P = NS
G1: new treatment G1: 21.63 ± 3.51 (17-29)
G1/G2: P < 0.05
G2: wait-list
Measure of treatment
fidelity reported:
Yes
G2: 21.61 ± 2.78 (17-26)
Beaumont et al., Co-interventions held
Assessment of ERSSQ score,
2008 (continued) stable during treatment:
Perception of follow-up group,
NR
Emotion score, mean ± SD
Concomitant therapies:
follow-up group, (range):
NR
mean ± SD (range): Post-treatment:
C-136