Exploring the effectiveness of the Pragmatic Intervention Programme (PICP) with children with autism spectrum disorder and developmental language disorder: A non-randomised controlled trial.
Tatiana Pereira, Ana Margarida Ramalho, Pedro Sá Couto and 1 others
PMID 39412294WHAT IT FOUND
After 24 one-hour speech therapy sessions, the 22 children in the intervention group with autism or developmental language disorder were rated by parents and educators as meeting at least two of three individual pragmatic goals.
Parent and educator reports and language scores also improved.
Key findings
01Parent and educator ratings of individually set goals averaged 13.6 and 12.2 for children with developmental language disorder and 12.1 and 11.9 for children with autism, above the expected total score of 9.
02Compared with the waiting-list control group, the intervention group showed significant large improvements in parent-rated communication, educator-rated communication, and standardised language scores.
03When the control group later received the programme, the study reported no statistically significant difference in change between the two groups for parent-rated communication, educator-rated communication, and standardised language scores.
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
Children were not randomly assigned, so differences between groups could have influenced the results. The intervention group had 22 children and the control group had 14, an imbalance the authors linked to pandemic recruitment. Parents and educators knew which children were receiving intervention, and they rated the primary outcome and one secondary outcome. The control group was a waiting list, not an active alternative treatment, so the study cannot separate the programme from attention, routine, or maturation. Intelligence quotient was not measured, although the authors say it can affect pragmatic language and response to intervention. Participants had to be native European Portuguese speakers and were recruited in Portugal, so the findings are tied to that language and setting.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The work was funded by the European Social Fund and the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology through research unit grants UIDB/4255/2020, UIDP/4255/2020, LA/P/0053/2020, UIDB/00214/2020, UIDB/04106/2020, and UIDP/04106/2020.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that PICP alone caused the improvements. The programme was delivered together with individually negotiated goals, parent and educator collaboration, peer involvement, and a naturalistic early childhood setting, and the study was not randomised and the main raters were not blinded.