ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2026
Feasibility, Acceptability, and Efficacy of an Ecological Momentary Intervention for Autistic Adults.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMany autistic adults experience limited access to scalable social-emotional supports, underscoring the need for low-intensity interventions that can be integrated into daily life. This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a one-week ecological momentary intervention (EMI) designed to enhance social attention and social-emotional functioning through in vivo real-time reporting of social interactions.
methodsThirty-one autistic adults were randomized to one of three conditions (facial expression, hair color, or passive control) and completed an EMI protocol and pre- and post-intervention measures.
resultsFeasibility outcomes were mixed: retention was high, but self-reported adherence fell below the a priori 80% benchmark, and utilization varied considerably. Equivalence tests indicated no condition differences in utilization, adherence, or acceptability. Net acceptability did not meet the a priori threshold of more than 50% of participants reporting neutral or positive net acceptability. Regression analyses revealed no condition-related effects on behavioral, self-report, or neural outcomes.
conclusionOverall, results suggested that the EMI achieved high retention, but did not meet the a priori thresholds of adequacy for adherence and acceptability, and did not produce detectable changes in social-emotional functioning. Refinements to EMI design and dose may be necessary to improve the potential impact of brief EMIs for autistic adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42911480What 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.