ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2022
Early Autism Intervention Components Deliverable by Non-specialists in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.
Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders and the Years Lived With Disability in Eastern Sub-Saharan Africa, From 1990 to 2023.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- Parent-mediated Paediatric Autism Communication Therapy (PACT): a focus group study of parental experience.Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health · 2026Article
- Scoping review: Facilitators, barriers, and cultural adaptations in the caregiver skills training program for children with developmental concerns.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2026Article
- "They are hard to navigate" exploring healthcare providers experiences managing Self-Injurious Behaviors among children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in Uganda.PLOS mental health · 2026Article
- Adapting an early autism caregiver coaching intervention for telehealth delivery in low-resource settings: A South African study of the 'what' and the 'why'.Autism : the international journal of research and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The past decade has seen key advances in early intervention for autistic children in high-income countries, with most evidence based on specialist delivery of interventions. The care gap seen in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) remains close to 100%. A key challenge in addressing this care gap concerns the paucity of specialists available to deliver services. Task-sharing provides an important potential solution; there is a need to identify interventions that are suitable for scaled-up delivery through task-sharing in low-resourced settings. We aimed to conduct a scoping review to identify studies which reported autism intervention delivered by non-specialists within LMIC and, using established frameworks, specify intervention components with evidence of successful non-specialist delivery. Methods: A scoping literature search, conducted within four databases, generated 2,535 articles. Duplicates were removed, followed by screening of titles and abstracts, with 10% double-rated for reliability. 50 full text articles were then screened independently by two raters. Articles were included if studies: (a) were conducted in LMIC; (b) included samples of autistic children (age < 10); (c) evaluated psycho-social interventions delivered by non-specialists; (d) reported child outcomes; and (e) were peer-reviewed full-texts in English. Two established frameworks - @Practicewise and NDBI-Fi framework - were then used to ascertain the commonly delivered components of these interventions. Results: Two studies met the inclusion criteria. Both studies evaluated parent-mediated interventions delivered by non-specialists in South Asia. Through the two frameworks, we identified elements and techniques that had been delivered successfully by non-specialists. Conclusion: There is evidence from two acceptability and feasibility trials that non-specialists can be trained to deliver some intervention elements and techniques within parent-mediated interventions, with good fidelity and acceptability and evidence of effectiveness. The review points up the lack of a widespread evidence base in this area and need for further research in low resourced settings, including well-powered trials and mechanistic analyses to identify active ingredients. A focus on the pre-requisites for non-specialist delivery is critical to reduce inequity and provide universal health coverage within resource-constrained health systems.
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.