ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2026
Efficacy of Interventions Adhering to the Revised Ayres Sensory Integration® Fidelity Measure: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2026. 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
purposeSensory integration therapy is used widely despite an inconsistent evidence base. To overcome the limited availability of high-quality research, Ayres Sensory Integration (ASI) was manualized and a revised fidelity measure was developed following the identification of the principles of ASI®. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the proximal and distal effects of interventions in studies that explicitly reported the use of or adherence to the process elements of the fidelity measure.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Following the screening of 2561 titles and abstracts, full-text screening was conducted. Appraisal was conducted on the quality of experimental studies and Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) administration.
resultsTen studies that involved children younger than 10 years were identified. Positive outcomes were reported in higher risk of bias studies and case studies. Only four studies were rated as having a low risk of bias. No study directly measured both proximal and distal outcomes, used blind assessors, and reported intervention fidelity data. Mixed results were reported in low risk of bias studies. The quality of the GAS used was poor in studies where positive outcomes were identified.
conclusionThere is limited current evidence to support the positive effect of interventions adhering to the ASI fidelity measure. Recommendations include (a) using practices or strategies that are supported by a higher level of evidence to explicitly address needs and functional goals prioritized by individuals and their families, and (b) modifying environments to support individuals who present with sensory difficulties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41903087What 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.