Project AIM: Autism intervention meta-analysis for studies of young children.
Project AIM: Autism intervention meta-analysis for studies of young children.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/bul0000215
复制
发表时间：
2020-01
影响因子：
22.4
通讯作者：
Woynaroski TG
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Sandbank M;Bottema-Beutel K;Crowley S;Cassidy M;Dunham K;Feldman JI;Crank J;Albarran SA;Raj S;Mahbub P;Woynaroski TG
在这篇针对自闭症谱系障碍（ASD）幼儿的非药物早期干预的组设计研究的全面系统综述和荟萃分析中，我们报告了7种早期干预类型的汇总效果。（行为、发育、自然发育行为干预[NDBI]、TEACCH、基于感觉、动物辅助和基于技术），和15个结果类别索引核心和相关ASD症状。从130个独立参与者样本中收集了1，615个效应量。共有6，240名参与者，年龄从0-8岁不等，在所有研究中均有代表。我们使用稳健的方差估计方法合成干预和结局类型内的效应，以解释研究内效应量的嵌套。我们还跟踪了研究质量指标，并报告了一组额外的汇总效应量，这些效应量将纳入的研究限制在符合预先规定的质量指标的研究中。最后，我们进行了主持人分析，以评估不同干预类型的汇总效应是否在近端效应方面大于远端效应，以及在背景约束效应方面大于广义效应。我们发现，当研究质量指标不考虑在内，显着的积极影响，发现行为，发展和NDBI干预类型。当效应量估计仅限于随机对照试验（RCT）设计的研究时，仅存在发育和NDBI干预类型的积极汇总效应的证据。排除母报告测量的结局时也是如此。最后，当效应估计仅限于RCT设计和无检测偏倚风险的结局时，没有干预类型对任何结局显示出显著影响。
In this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of group design studies of nonpharmacological early interventions designed for young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), we report summary effects across seven early intervention types (behavioral, developmental, naturalistic developmental behavioral intervention [NDBI], TEACCH, sensory-based, animal-assisted, and technology-based), and 15 outcome categories indexing core and related ASD symptoms. A total of 1,615 effect sizes were gathered from 130 independent participant samples. A total of 6,240 participants, who ranged in age from 0–8 years, are represented across the studies. We synthesized effects within intervention and outcome type using a robust variance estimation approach to account for the nesting of effect sizes within studies. We also tracked study quality indicators, and report an additional set of summary effect sizes that restrict included studies to those meeting pre-specified quality indicators. Finally, we conducted moderator analyses to evaluate whether summary effects across intervention types were larger for proximal as compared to distal effects, and for context-bound as compared to generalized effects. We found that when study quality indicators were not taken into account, significant positive effects were found for behavioral, developmental, and NDBI intervention types. When effect size estimation was limited to studies with randomized controlled trial (RCT) designs, evidence of positive summary effects existed only for developmental and NDBI intervention types. This was also the case when outcomes measured by parent report were excluded. Finally, when effect estimation was limited to RCT designs and to outcomes for which there was no risk of detection bias, no intervention types showed significant effects on any outcome.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.9
作者：
Bailey, Benjamin;Arciuli, Joanne;Stancliffe, Roger J.
通讯作者：
Stancliffe, Roger J.
DOI：
10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00338.x
发表时间：
2004-11-01
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Aldred, C;Green, J;Adams, C
通讯作者：
Adams, C
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Bass, Margaret M.;Duchowny, Catherine A.;Llabre, Maria M.
通讯作者：
Llabre, Maria M.
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Ben-Sasson, Ayelet;Hen, Liat;Gal, Eynat
通讯作者：
Gal, Eynat
影响因子：
3.9
作者：
Ausderau, Karla;Sideris, John;Baranek, Grace T.
通讯作者：
Baranek, Grace T.