Ahead of World Autism Day on 2nd April, we present a selection of the latest research in this field. It starts with Zimmerman et al’s systematic review of 27 studies published over the past 26 years. This provides a succinct summary of risk factors for poor psychosocial outcomes for adults with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder.
The next two papers give positive accounts of new interventions that assist children and young people with autism to overcome their difficulties. Corbett et al examine stress during a social interaction finding that, in contrast to previous research, found no significant differences in the stress hormone, cortisol, when ASD and TD adolescents were engaged in a video-game. The game’s structure and predictability were considered the key difference, but being slightly older may also be relevant. Einfeld at al’s multi-school examination of the Secret Agent Society (SAS) Program found that this engaging, game-based delivery of socio-emotional skills training was associated with sustained improvements in the emotion regulation and social skills of young people with ASD, both during the sessions and (unusually) up to 12 months later. Yet Iacono et al’s study offers a sobering perspective on service variation: the quality of support was less than optimal for most children with autism and parents living in low-resource, rural settings. They conclude that a strong policy drive is required to address the many factors that combined to prevent children from benefitting from effective interventions. Collaboration between funders, service providers, practitioners and researchers would be necessary to overcome them.
Different points of entry to this field were adopted by the next two studies. Dachez & Ndobo compared alternative interventions aimed at improving the attitudes that students without disabilities hold towards individuals with high-functioning autism. Pandolfi et al examined interactions between diagnoses by finding acceptable reliability and validity of an autism screening scale when used with children and young people who have Down’s syndrome.
The final five papers offer new perspectives on parents of people with autism. Due et al identify the benefits of pre-school centres, which in addition to intervening with their child and supporting them with advice and validation, allow parents to continue working or pursuing other valued activities and to rebuild their relationship with one another. Raymond-Barker et al reported problems identified by mothers consequent on diagnosing autism in adults, in the absence of either post-diagnostic support or additional resource. McIntyre & Brown examined the degree to which a range of child and service factors affect maternal utilisation of social support. Golya & McIntyre multivariate analysis found that the child’s symptom severity (and not caregiver depression) was the principal influence on their functioning. The special issue ends with Paynter et al’s examination of fathers’ experiences: stress and depression were common. The study used the Double ABCX model: this provided a useful framework for the research, which may also inform practical support.
These papers attest to the increasingly fine-grained approaches taken to the support and education provided to many children and young people with autism, and to their parents. We look forward to this depth of consideration reaching people with autism who also have intellectual disabilities, and their families.