Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40415765›Full record

ReviewAutism & developmental language impairments

The State of Natural Language Sampling in Autism Research: A Scoping Review.

Samantha N Plate

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Autism & developmental language impairments. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Expressive Language Sample Concordance With ADOS-2 Scores: Autism, Down Syndrome, Fragile X Syndrome.American journal on intellectual and developmental disabilities · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
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

1 author.

Samantha N PlateDepartment of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8812-5534

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and aims: Caregiver reports and standardized assessments have been the primary methods used to study language development in autism. However, these forms of measurement are often coarse, complicated by floor effects and reporter bias, and limited by the fact that they only capture how children Method: Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a search for studies published in the last 15 years across three databases was conducted. After removing duplicates, 4,671 titles and abstracts were screened and 59 papers met inclusion criteria. Sample characteristics, natural language collection methods, and derived measures were extracted and tabled for each study. The most prevalent NLS methods and measures in autism language research are reviewed and the benefits and drawbacks of various methods are discussed. Main contribution: This scoping review highlights subgroups of the autistic population that have been underrepresented in NLS studies-in particular, minimally/nonspeaking school-aged autistic children. This article also examines means to collect a "naturalistic" sample of language. Notably, studies did not address whether autistic children exhibit different social communication skills when talking to different types of social partners. Broadly, research has underreported key methodological details, making comparisons across studies difficult. Conclusions: This review highlights the appropriate use of NLS across development in autism and makes recommendations for NLS future research. Implications: Additional work is needed to address the gaps described in this article and replicate previous findings to identify patterns of natural language across the literature.

Indexed as

Autismnaturalistic observationnatural language sampling

Identifiers

PMID40415765
PMCPMC12102570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.