Brief Report: Assessment of a Caregiver-Implemented Intervention for Improving Social Communication Skills in Toddlers and Young Children with Autism.
Audrey A Rouhandeh, Christine Honsberger, Nathaniel A Shanok and 7 others
PMID 35616818WHAT IT FOUND
In eight toddlers, a four-week caregiver coaching program was linked to increased caregiver knowledge and improvements in social affect and language skills during the treatment period.
Changes were not seen before or after the intervention. This small pilot suggests the approach is feasible and warrants a controlled trial.
Key findings
01Caregiver knowledge scores significantly increased from an average of 54.29% to 88.57% after the four-week intervention.
02Children's social affect scores on the ADOS-2 significantly decreased (indicating improvement) only during the treatment interval, with no significant change in the baseline or follow-up periods.
03Receptive and expressive language raw scores on the MSEL showed significant improvement specifically during the treatment interval, but not during the baseline or follow-up intervals.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study had a very small sample size of eight children. There was no control group, so it is impossible to rule out natural development or the effects of other ongoing services as causes for the improvements. Examiners and caregivers were not blinded to the treatment, which may have influenced ratings on subjective measures. Half of the participants (four of eight) were lost to follow-up, meaning the long-term effects are unknown for most of the sample. Caregivers were predominantly highly educated and from high-income households, so the results may not apply to other populations.
Declared interests
The study was funded by the Autism Foundation and the Beatrice and Samuel A. Seaver Foundation. The text does not report any personal financial conflicts of interest for the authors.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the improvements during the treatment window as proof that SIAT causes clinical change. Without a control group, the pattern of improvement during treatment and stability before and after could reflect natural developmental spurts, regression to the mean, or unblinded rater bias rather than the specific effect of the intervention.