SynthesisPloS one2023
Friendship interventions for children with neurodevelopmental needs: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors associated with better emotional, behavioural and educational outcomes in children with mild intellectual difficulties.JCPP advances · 2026Article
- Advances in supporting development in autistic children and youth.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleChildren with neurodevelopmental disorders such as attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, developmental language disorder (DLD), intellectual disability (ID), and social (pragmatic) communication disorder (SPCD) experience difficulties with social functioning due to differences in their social, emotional and cognitive skills. Previous systematic reviews have focussed on specific aspects of social functioning rather than broader peer functioning and friendships.
objectiveTo systematically review and methodologically appraise the quality and effectiveness of existing intervention studies that measured friendship outcomes for children with ADHD, autism, DLD, ID, and SPCD.
methodFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we searched five electronic databases: CINAHL, Embase, Eric, PsycINFO, and PubMed. Two independent researchers screened all abstracts and disagreements were discussed with a third researcher to reach consensus. The methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomised Trials.
resultsTwelve studies involving 15 interventions were included. Studies included 683 children with a neurodevelopmental disorder and 190 typically-developing children and diagnosed with either autism or ADHD. Within-group meta-analysis showed that the pooled intervention effects for friendship across all interventions were small to moderate (z = 2.761, p = 0.006, g = 0.485). The pooled intervention effect between intervention and comparison groups was not significant (z = 1.206, p = 0.400, g = 0.215).
conclusionFindings provide evidence that some individual interventions are effective in improving social functioning and fostering more meaningful friendships between children with neurodevelopmental disorders and their peers. Effective interventions involved educators, targeted child characteristics known to moderate peer functioning, actively involved peers, and incorporated techniques to facilitate positive peer perceptions and strategies to support peers. Future research should evaluate the effectiveness of friendship interventions for children with DLD, ID and SPCD, more comprehensively assess peer functioning, include child self-report measures of friendship, and longitudinally evaluate downstream effects on friendship.
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.