Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34661613›Full record

SynthesisJAMA pediatrics2021

Behavioral Intervention for Social Challenges in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Simone J Darling, Marquelle Goods, Nicholas P Ryan, Anita K Chisholm, Kristina Haebich, Jonathan M Payne

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Novel therapeutics in autism spectrum disorder.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Simone J DarlingClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Marquelle GoodsClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Nicholas P RyanClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Anita K ChisholmClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Kristina HaebichClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Jonathan M PayneClinical Sciences, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Royal Children's Hospital · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Social deficits are a common and disabling feature of many pediatric disorders; however, whether behavioral interventions are associated with benefits for children and adolescents with social deficits is poorly understood. Objective: To assess whether behavioral interventions in children and adolescents with neurodevelopmental or mental health disorders are associated with improvements in social function and social cognition, and whether patient, intervention, and methodological characteristics moderate the association. Data Sources: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and PubMed electronic databases were searched in December 2020 for randomized clinical trials published from database inception to December 1, 2020, including terms related to neurodevelopmental or mental health disorders, social behavior, randomized clinical trials, and children and adolescents. Data were analyzed in January 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials that enrolled participants aged 4 to 17 years with social deficits and examined the efficacy of a clinician-administered behavioral intervention targeting social functioning or social cognition were included. A total of 9314 records were identified, 78 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 33 articles were included in the study; 31 of these reported social function outcomes and 12 reported social cognition outcomes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Articles were reviewed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment for randomized clinical trials. Data were independently extracted and pooled using a weighted random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the association of behavioral intervention with social function and social cognition. Hedges g was used to measure the standardized mean difference between intervention and control groups. Standardized effect sizes were calculated for the intervention group vs the comparison group for each trial. Results: A total of 31 trials including 2131 participants (1711 [80%] male; 420 [20%] female; mean [SD] age, 10.8 [2.2] years) with neurodevelopmental or mental health disorders (autism spectrum disorder [ASD] [n = 23], attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [n = 4], other conditions associated with social deficits [n = 4]) were analyzed to examine differences in social function between the intervention and control groups. Significantly greater gains in social function were found among participants who received an intervention than among the control groups (Hedges g, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.40-0.83; P < .001). The type of control condition (wait list vs active control vs treatment as usual) was a significant moderator of effect size (Q2, 7.11; P = .03). Twelve studies including 487 individuals with ASD (48 [10%] female; 439 [90%] male; mean [SD] age, 10.4 [1.7] years) were analyzed to examine differences in social cognition between intervention and control groups. The overall mean weighted effect was significant (Hedges g, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.39-0.96; P < .001), indicating the treatment groups had better performance on social cognitive tasks. Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, significantly greater gains in social function and social cognition were reported among children and adolescents who received behavioral interventions for social deficits compared with participants receiving the control conditions. These findings suggest that children and adolescents with social deficits might benefit from social skills training regardless of their specific neurodevelopmental or mental health diagnosis.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapySocial BehaviorSocial CognitionAdolescentChildFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSocial Skills

Identifiers

PMID34661613
PMCPMC8524357
OpenAlexW3206721269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.