Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders

Evidence Table. Therapies for children with ASD
Study
Inclusion/Exclusion Baseline
Description Intervention
Criteria/Population Measures Outcomes
Author:
Intervention:
Inclusion criteria: Communication/ Communication/
Gulsrud et al., Joint attention or symbolic • Preschool children from language: language:
2007
play intervention,
an existing intervention Probe acknow- Probe acknow-
Country: administered during 5-8 study for preschool ledgement, %: ledgement, %:
US
week preschool program children diagnosed with G1: 47
G1: 88.2
Practice for 6 hours daily
ASD
G2: 66
G2: 55.6
setting:
Groups:
Exclusion criteria: Verbalizations, G1/G2: P < 0.05
Academic
Intervention
setting:
Clinic
Enrollment
period:
NR
Funding:
NIH
Author industry
relationship
disclosures:
NR
Design:
RCT
Note:
See related study
Wong
2007{#3875},
Kasari
2008{#184},
Kasari
2006{#540}, and
Jahromi
2009{#3615}
G1: joint attention • Seizures
mean ± SD:
G2: symbolic play • Sensory or physical G1: 0.30 ± 0.26
Provider:
disorders
G2: 0.67 ± 0.26
NR
• Comorbidity with any Non-verbal
Assessments:
other psychological gestures, mean ±
Auditory-visual and disorder or disease SD:
auditory probes presented • Children not given the G1: 0.05 ± 0.06
at the beginning, middle study’s novel probe G2: 0.05 ± 0.06
and end of the treatment activation at the 3 study Ability to engage in
phase; responses: eye time points due to coordinated joint
gaze, affect, non-verbal scheduling conflicts looks during probe
gestures, verbalization Age, months ± SD: activation, %
Measure of treatment G1: 42.65 ± 7.13 G1: 35.7
fidelity reported: G2: 43.11 ± 6.93 G2: 50
Yes
Age range (months):
Co-interventions held Total: 33-54
stable during treatment: Mental age, months ± SD:
NR
G1: 25.74 ± 9.00
Concomitant therapies: G2: 26.64 ± 7.90
NR
Gender, n:
N at enrollment: Male:
G1: 20
G1: 13
G2: 20
G2: 15
N at follow-up:
Female:
G1: 17
G1: 4
G2: 18
G2: 3
Race/ethnicity, n:
White:
G1: 12
G2: 14
Minority:
G1: 5
G2: 4
SES:
Maternal education, n:
Completed high school:
G1: 0
G2: 2
Some college/technical:
G1: 2
G2: 2
College/professional
training:
G1: 15
G2: 14
Probe acknowledgement
changes, %:
No change:
G1: 58.5
G2: 55.6
Increase:
G1: 41.2
G2: 16.7
G1/G2: P < 0.05
Verbalizations,
mean ± SD:
G1: 2.5 ± 0.80
G2: 1.3 ± 0.78
G1/G2: P = NS
Non-verbal
gestures, mean ±
SD:
G1: 0.60 ± 0.30
G2: 0.83 ± 0.30
G1/G2: P = NS
Ability to engage
in coordinated
joint looks during
probe activation,
%
G1: 76.5
G2: 38.9
G1/G2: P < 0.05
Harms:
NR
Gulsrud et al.,
Household income: NR
Modifiers:
2007 (continued)
Diagnostic approach:
Significant group
In Study
difference in the
Diagnostic tool/method:
duration of
Referral diagnosis
coordinated joint
C-217