ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2013
Treatments for neurodevelopmental disorders: evidence, advocacy, and the Internet.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Choice and Trade-offs: Parent Decision Making for Neurotechnologies for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy.Journal of child neurology · 2021Article
- Googling for Neurological Disorders: From Seeking Health-Related Information to Patient Empowerment, Advocacy, and Open, Public Self-Disclosure in the Neurology 2.0 Era.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Article
- Neurobehavioral Disorder Associated with Prenatal Alcohol Exposure (ND-PAE): Proposed DSM-5 Diagnosis.Child psychiatry and human development · 2016Review
- Age at diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders: is there an association with socioeconomic status and family self-education about autism?Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2016Article
- Management of children with autism spectrum disorder in the dental setting: concerns, behavioural approaches and recommendations.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The Internet is a major source of health-related information for parents of sick children despite concerns surrounding quality. For neurodevelopmental disorders, the websites of advocacy groups are a largely unexamined source of information. We evaluated treatment information posted on nine highly-trafficked advocacy websites for autism, cerebral palsy, and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. We found that the majority of claims about treatment safety and efficacy were unsubstantiated. Instead, a range of rhetorical strategies were used to imply scientific support. When peer-reviewed publications were cited, 20 % were incorrect or irrelevant. We call for new partnerships between advocacy and experts in developmental disorders to ensure better accuracy and higher transparency about how treatment information is selected and evidenced on advocacy websites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.