ReviewPakistan journal of medical sciences2025
Efficacy of structured teaching program for rehabilitation of children with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & Objective: The Structured Teaching Program, based on the Treatment and Education of Autistic and Related Communication Handicapped Children (TEACCH) program approach, has been a cornerstone in the educational rehabilitation of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This study assesses the efficacy of structured teaching program in managing ASD children. Methodology: Systematic search of Medline, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and trial registries was done for trials comparing structured teaching program with no treatment, alternative treatments, or as part of multimodal intervention in children with ASD from inception of database till end date of search (31 January 2025). We used Cochrane risk of bias-2 tool and risk of bias tool for non-randomized trials to assess quality of studies and effect sizes were calculated using standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Pooled analysis included 10 studies. Significant (p<0.05) improvements were observed in fine (SMD=0.45; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.79) and gross motor skills (SMD=0.54; 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.88). High heterogeneity was found across most outcomes. However, no significant improvements were noted in communication (SMD=-0.33; 95% CI: - 1.99 to 1.33), socialization (SMD=0.12; 95% CI:- 0.61 to 0.85), daily living (SMD=-0.09; 95% CI:- 1.62 to 1.44) and cognitive performance (SMD=0.07; 95% CI:- 0.43 to 0.57). Conclusion: The structured teaching program shows potential in improving motor skills in children with ASD but does not consistently enhance other developmental domains. Personalizing structured teaching program to individual needs and integrating it with other therapies may be necessary to maximize its efficacy. Study registration: PROSPERO, CRD42023480468.
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.