Search

One core component of the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised involves supporting parents to change their interaction and communication style with their child. This behaviour change has been found to affect child outcomes. Implementation science methodologies offer a range of opportunities to investigate how interventions are delivered in practice; however, few autism intervention studies have used such designs to explore the behaviour change of parents. We interviewed 27 parents and explored their use of intervention strategies after the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised trial. We employed the Theoretical Domains Framework and Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to systematically explore a range of barriers and facilitators experienced by the parents associated with parents’ characteristics, their context and features of the intervention. Our analysis revealed barriers and facilitators across three themes: Motivating Factors, which was further subdivided into Compatibility and Buy-In and Alignment of Goals and Outcomes; Opportunity and Support; Parent Characteristics. Almost all parents reported continued use of the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised strategies. Facilitators (e.g. parental confidence in using the strategies) and barriers (e.g. child’s behaviour) were identified. Consideration of these factors can inform identification of implementation strategies to test in future studies of Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised and other parent-mediated early autism interventions. Lay abstract Many early autism interventions teach parents therapeutic strategies to help them adjust their communication style with their children. Research has shown that this behaviour change in parents leads to improvements in child communication. It is, therefore, important to learn what factors support or hinder parents in their use of therapeutic strategies learned in such interventions. This study set out to interview parents who had participated in a research trial of the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised intervention. We interviewed 27 caregivers and explored their use of the strategies up to 2 years after the end of the research trial. Qualitative frameworks were used to inform interview questions and data analysis. These frameworks focused on a range of contextual factors, including parents’ characteristics, their context and features of the intervention. Parents reported barriers and facilitators to using Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised strategies across three themes: Motivating Factors; Opportunity and Support; Parent Characteristics. One of these themes, Motivating Factors, was further divided into the subthemes Compatibility and Buy-In and Alignment of Goals and Outcomes. Almost all parents reported continued use of the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy–Generalised strategies. Facilitators included parental confidence in using the strategies and barriers included child’s behaviour. Consideration of these factors can inform ways to better support parents in future autism interventions.

BACKGROUND: There are very few mechanistic studies of the long-term impact of psychosocial interventions in childhood. The parent-mediated Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy (PACT) RCT showed sustained effects on autistic child outcomes from pre-school to mid-childhood. We investigated the mechanism by which the PACT intervention achieved these effects.METHODS: Of 152 children randomised to receive PACT or treatment as usual between 2 and 5 years of age, 121 (79.6%) were followed 5-6 years after the endpoint at a mean age of 10.5 years. Assessors, blind to the intervention group, measured Autism Diagnostic Observation Scale Calibrated Severity Score (ADOS CSS) for child autistic behaviours and Teacher Vineland (TVABS) for adaptive behaviour in school. Hypothesised mediators were child communication initiations with caregivers in a standard play observation (Dyadic Communication Measure for Autism, DCMA). Hypothesised moderators of mediation were baseline child non-verbal age equivalent scores (AE), communication and symbolic development (CSBS) and 'insistence on sameness' (IS). Structural equation modelling was used in a repeated measures mediation design.RESULTS: Good model fits were obtained. The treatment effect on child dyadic initiation with the caregiver was sustained through the follow-up period. Increased child initiation at treatment midpoint mediated the majority (73%) of the treatment effect on follow-up ADOS CSS. A combination of partial mediation from midpoint child initiations and the direct effect of treatment also contributed to a near-significant total effect on follow-up TVABS. No moderation of this mediation was found for AE, CSBS or IS.CONCLUSIONS: Early sustained increase in an autistic child's communication initiation with their caregiver is largely responsible for the long-term effects from PACT therapy on autistic and adaptive behaviour outcomes. This supports the theoretical logic model of PACT therapy but also illuminates fundamental causal processes of social and adaptive development in autism over time: early social engagement in autism can be improved and this can have long-term generalised outcome effects.

This systematic review synthesizes the empirical literature examining pragmatic language in children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Using a taxonomy of pragmatic language, we compared the pragmatic language profiles of children with ADHD to those of typically developing (TD) children and children with autism. Three databases were searched up to October 2019: PsychInfo; PubMed; and CSA Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts. We included 34 studies reporting on 2,845 children (ADHD = 1,407; TD = 1,058; autism = 380). Quality and risk of bias assessments included sample size and representativeness; measure reliability and validity; and missing data management. Children with ADHD were found to have higher rates of pragmatic difficulties than their TD peers. Specific difficulties were identified with inappropriate initiation, presupposition, social discourse, and narrative coherence. Children with ADHD appear to differ from those with autism in the degree of their pragmatic language impairments. General language skills contribute to, but do not explain, pragmatic difficulties in samples of children with ADHD. Though the extant evidence is limited, a preliminary profile of the pragmatic language impairments in children with ADHD is indicated. This supports a call for evidence-based interventions that include pragmatic language skills training.

Background: Autistic children can have difficulty generalising treatment effects beyond the immediate treatment context. Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy (PACT) has been successful when delivered in the clinic. Here we tested the Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy-Generalised (PACT-G) intervention combined between home and education settings for its overall effect and mechanistic transmission of effect across contexts. Methods: In this parallel, single-blind, randomised, controlled trial, we recruited autistic children aged 2–11 years in urban or semi-urban areas in Manchester, Newcastle, and London, England. Children needed to meet core autism criteria on Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule-second edition (ADOS-2) and parent-rated Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ-lifetime), and children older than 5 years were included if they had intentional communication but expressive language equivalent of age 4 years or younger. Eligible children were randomly assigned (1:1), using block randomisation (random block sizes of 2 and 4) and stratified for site, age (2–4 years vs 5–11 years), and gender, to either PACT-G plus treatment as usual or treatment as usual alone. Research assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The PACT-G intervention was delivered by a therapist in parallel to the child's parents at home and to learning-support assistants (LSA) at their place of education, using both in-person and remote sessions over a 6 month period, to optimise adult–child social interaction. Treatment as usual included any health support or intervention from education or local community services. The primary outcome was autism symptom severity using the ADOS-2, as measured by researchers, at 12 months versus baseline. Secondary outcomes were Brief Observation of Social Communication Change (BOSCC) and dyadic social interaction between child and adult across contexts, both at 12 months. Other secondary outcome measures were assessed using the following composites: language, anxiety, repetitive behaviour, adaptive behaviour, parental wellbeing, child health-related quality of life, and disruptive behaviour. Assessments were done at baseline, 7 months, and 12 months. We used an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of covariance for the efficacy outcome measures. Adverse events were assessed by researchers for all trial families at each contact and by therapists in the PACT-G group at each visit. This study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN 25378536. Findings: Between Jan 18, 2017, and April 19, 2018, 555 children were referred and 249 were eligible, agreed to participate, and were randomly assigned to either PACT-G (n=122) or treatment as usual (n=127). One child in the PACT-G group withdrew and requested their data be removed from the study, giving an ITT population of 248 children. 51 (21%) of 248 children were female, 197 (79%) were male, 149 (60%) were White, and the mean age was 4·0 years (SD 0·6). The groups were well balanced for demographic and clinical characteristics. In the PACT-G group, parents of children received a median of 10 (IQR 8–12) home sessions and LSAs received a median of 8 (IQR 5–10) education sessions over 6 months. We found no treatment effect on the ADOS-2 primary outcome compared with treatment as usual (effect size 0·04 [95% CI –0·19 to 0·26]; p=0·74), or researcher-assessed BOSCC (0·03 [–0·25 to 0·31]), language composite (–0·03 [–0·15 to 0·10]), repetitive behaviour composite (0·00 [–0·35 to 0·35]), adaptive behaviour composite (0·01 [–0·15 to 0·18]), or child wellbeing (0·09 [–0·15 to 0·34]). PACT-G treatment improved synchronous response in both parent (0·50 [0·36 to 0·65]) and LSA (0·33 [0·16 to 0·50]), mediating increased child communication with parent (0·26 [0·12 to 0·40]) and LSA (0·20 [0·06 to 0·34]). Child dyadic communication change mediated outcome symptom alteration on BOSCC at home (indirect effect –0·78 [SE 0·34; 95% CI –1·44 to –0·11]; p=0·022) although not in education (indirect effect –0·67 [SE 0·37; 95% CI –1·40 to 0·06]; p=0·073); such an effect was not seen on ADOS-2. Treatment with PACT-G also improved the parental wellbeing composite (0·44 [0·08 to 0·79]) and the child disruptive behaviour composite in home and education (0·29 [0·01 to 0·57]). Adverse events on child behaviour and wellbeing were recorded in 13 (10%) of 127 children in the treatment as usual group (of whom four [31%] were girls) and 11 (9%) of 122 in the PACT-G group (of whom three [33%] were girls). One serious adverse event on parental mental health was recorded in the PACT-G group and was possibly study related. Interpretation: Although we found no effect on the primary outcome compared with treatment as usual, adaptation of the 12-month PACT intervention into briefer multicomponent delivery across home and education preserved the positive proximal outcomes, although smaller in effect size, and the original pattern of treatment mediation seen in clinic-delivered therapy, as well as improving parental wellbeing and child disruptive behaviours across home and school. Reasons for this reduced efficacy might be the reduced dose of each component, the effect of remote delivery, and the challenges of the delivery contexts. Caution is needed in assuming that changing delivery methods and context will preserve an original intervention efficacy for autistic children. Funding: National Institute for Health Research and Medical Research Council Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation Award.

Researchers have generally considered autistic individuals to have difficulties generalising learned skills across novel contexts. Successful generalisation is necessary for an intervention to have benefits in everyday life beyond the original learning environment. We conducted a systematic review of randomised controlled trials of early social communication interventions for children with autism in order to explore generalisation and its measurement. We identified nine RCTs that provided evidence of initial target learning and measured generalisation, of which eight demonstrated at least some successful generalisation across people, settings, and/or activities. The findings did not support the widely reported generalisation 'difficulties' associated with autism. However, generalisation was not consistent across all skills within studies, and one study found no generalisation despite evidence for initial target learning within the intervention context. In general, there are few methodologically sound social communication intervention studies exploring generalisation in autism and no consensus on how it should be measured. In particular, failure to demonstrate initial learning of target skills within the intervention setting and an absence of formal mediation analyses of the hypothesised mechanisms limit current research. We outline a framework within which measurement of generalisation can be considered for use in future trials. To maximise the effectiveness of interventions, the field needs to gain a better understanding of the nature of generalisation among autistic individuals and what additional strategies may further enhance learning. Autism Res 2020, 13: 506-522. © 2020 The Authors. Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: It is generally considered that autistic individuals experience difficulties applying things they have learned in one context into different settings (e.g. from school to home). This is important to consider for intervention studies. Our review does not support a complete lack of generalisation but instead suggests that after early social communication intervention, autistic children can transfer some skills to new contexts. Overall, there is limited research in this area and further work is needed.

This chapter explores vegan vlogs presented on YouTube as a site to explore contemporary social media meaning-making related to food and dietary restriction, self and wellness. In Western countries, food and eating have often fallen within the scope of public health, with ‘healthy eating’ guidelines developed at the population level. The specifics of such guidelines shift and evolve, but food tends to be broken down into broad food ‘groups’, with proportional amounts of each group advised. Unlike many Western government-approved healthy eating guidelines, which promote variety and ‘balance’, these diets tend to promote the exclusion of whole food groups, or food processes, or food at particular times. Veganism–a diet involving the avoidance of animal-based products, including meat, seafood, dairy products and eggs–offers a potentially different mode of dietary consumption and restriction. Blogs and vlogs, their audio-visual sibling, offer particular spaces for food/eating representation and discourse.

We investigated the early sociocognitive battery (ESB), a novel measure of preverbal social communication skills, in children with autism participating in the Paediatric Autism Communication Trial-Generalised (PACT-G). The associations between ESB scores, language and autism symptoms were assessed in 249 children aged 2-11 years. The results show that ESB subscale scores (social responsiveness, joint attention and symbolic comprehension) were significantly associated with concurrent autism symptoms and receptive and expressive language levels. The pattern of association between the ESB subscale scores differed between the ADOS-2 symptom domains and expressive and receptive language. These findings indicate the potential utility of the ESB as a measure of preverbal social communication in children with autism.

Adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or bipolar disorder (BD) may display similar cognitive impairments and clinical symptoms, which might reflect shared mechanisms. Initial evidence indicates disorder-specific and overlapping neurophysiological alterations using event-related potentials (ERPs) in individuals with BD or ADHD during attentional tasks, but it is unknown whether impairments generalize across other processes and tasks. We conduct the first comparison between women with ADHD (n = 20), women with BD (n = 20) and control women (n = 20) on ERPs from a performance-monitoring flanker task. The BD group showed a significantly attenuated frontal ERP of conflict monitoring (N2) compared to the ADHD group across both low-conflict (congruent) and high-conflict (incongruent) task conditions, and compared to controls in the high-conflict condition. However, when controlling for an earlier attentional ERP (frontal N1), which was significantly reduced in participants with BD compared to participants with ADHD and controls, N2 group differences were no longer significant. These results indicate that ERP differences in conflict monitoring may be attributable to differences in earlier attentional processes. These findings identify neural differences in early attention between BD and ADHD which precede conflict monitoring processes, potentially pointing to distinct neural mechanisms implicated in the two disorders.

Anxiety is a prevalent and impairing co-morbidity among individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), yet assessment measures, including screening tools, are seldom validated with autism samples. We explored the psychometric properties of the child and parent reports of the Spence Children’s Anxiety Scale (SCAS) and the Screen for Anxiety Related Disorder-71 (SCARED-71) with 49 males with ASD (10–16 years, 63% co-occurring anxiety). Both measures had excellent internal consistency and fair-good parent–child agreement. The SCAS has a higher proportion of items evaluating observable behaviors. Predictive power of the measures did not differ. Higher cut-points in the parent reports (SCARED only) and lower cut-points in the child reports may enhance prediction in this sample. Choice of measure and cut-points should be considered alongside intended purpose.