ArticlePediatric research2025
Effectiveness of individual versus group Early Start Denver Model interventions in children with autism spectrum disorder.
Article in Pediatric research, 2025. 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.
- Through Parents' Eyes: Perspectives on Child Development and Family Experience During ESDM Intervention.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2026Article
- Neuroplasticity mechanisms of NDBIs in autism: a review from brain connectivity to behavioral improvement.European journal of medical research · 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
backgroundWe investigated the effectiveness of individual-Early Start Denver Model (I-ESDM) and group-ESDM (G-ESDM) intervention in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) at varying ability levels.
methodsA total of 404 children were divided into I-ESDM (n = 237) and G-ESDM (n = 167) groups, receiving 3-month of intervention. The I-ESDM group had a staff-to-child ratio of 1:1, while the G-ESDM group had a ratio of 2:6. Clinical symptoms, neurodevelopment, and parenting stress were evaluated both pre- and post-treatment.
resultsAfter 3 months, both interventions significantly improved clinical symptoms, neurodevelopment, and reduced parenting stress in children with ASD. In the language age group under 2 years, the I-ESDM subgroup showed greater improvements in clinical symptoms compared to the G-ESDM subgroup. In the ≥2-year language age group and the general quotient (GQ) ≥ 70 group, the G-ESDM subgroup demonstrated greater improvements in clinical symptoms and neurodevelopment compared to the I-ESDM subgroup.
conclusionBoth I-ESDM and G-ESDM effectively improve clinical symptoms, neurodevelopment, and reduce parenting stress in children with ASD. I-ESDM was more effective for children with a language age <2 years, while G-ESDM showed better outcomes for those with a language age ≥2 years or GQ ≥ 70. IMPACT: After 3 months, both individual-Early Start Denver Model (I-ESDM) and group-ESDM (G-ESDM) significantly improved clinical symptoms, neurodevelopment, and reduced parenting stress in children with ASD. The I-ESDM subgroup showed greater improvements in clinical symptoms in children under 2 years of age. The G-ESDM subgroup demonstrated superior improvements in clinical symptoms and neurodevelopment in children aged ≥2 years or those with GQ ≥ 70.
Identifiers
40957979What 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.