SynthesisFrontiers in psychiatry2026
Artificial intelligence-supported therapeutic interventions for autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychiatry, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increased prevalence of ASD has generated a pressing demand for flexible therapeutic and educational tools. AI has been suggested as a potential bridge to this gap, but the translation from a model to a clinical application necessitates rigorous assessment. The purpose of the present review is to compile and examine the existing literature to demonstrate AI interventions that have advanced from a proposed model to being used with human participants. Methods: We systematically searched five databases (Embase, PubMed, ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science; Jan 2016-Dec 2025) for AI-based ASD interventions. Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility. Inclusion criteria were as followed: (1) participants with confirmed ASD diagnoses; (2) an intervention sample size of N ≥ 6; (3) AI as a central therapeutic, educational, or rehabilitative component; and (4) multi-session protocols with specified timeframes. Study types ranged from system development and feasibility trials to RCTs. Results: 14 studies met inclusion criteria. AI (e.g. robotics, VR, and wearables) functioned as a social mediator, improving social-emotional outcomes (e.g., ADOS, SRS scores) by reducing cognitive load. Significant mechanisms included real-time task adaptation and precise behavioral monitoring via e.g. eye-tracking. However, significant heterogeneity was observed in intervention dosage (median 4-12 hours). Most studies were limited by small, male-dominated samples (N < 20) and a total absence of adult participants. Conclusion: Based on the findings, AI seems highly promising for patient-specific ASD therapy via proactive, data-driven scaffolding. In order to move toward implementation of AI in ASD care, more RCTs and crucial augmentation of representation gaps concerning adult and female ASD phenotype studies are required.
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.