Peptides DB
Research-centric peptide and protocol reference hub
Study 24 of 38SS-31 literaturebiorxiv-preprint · Meta-analysis2026

Parent-mediated interventions versus usual care in children with autism: A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

This meta-analysis found no significant benefits of parent-mediated interventions on autism characteristics or related outcomes, indicating that further research is needed to evaluate their effectiveness.

Read at biorxiv-preprintAdd to compare

Where it sits

this study against the rest of the ss-31 corpus
4
Preclinical
26
Observational
0
Open-label
3
Randomised
5
Reviews · this one

Summary and findings

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effects of parent-mediated interventions (PMIs) versus usual care in children with autism. A total of 32 trials involving 1,625 participants were included. The analysis found no significant benefits of PMIs on autism characteristics or other secondary outcomes.

How much of this paper we could read: full text read (0.80). We had a clear abstract, so the summary below closely tracks the paper. What this means →
MD = −0.88; 95% confidence interval −2.92 to 1.15; p = 0.05, 4 trials, N = 353, low certainty.2026

Abstract

The authors’ words, as biorxiv-preprint supplied them

<h4>Objectives</h4> To evaluate the positive and adverse effects of parent-mediated interventions (PMIs) versus care as usual for children with autism. <h4>Setting</h4> Systematic review and meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA), following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. <h4>Methods</h4> We searched for randomised clinical trials of PMIs for children with autism in the databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, LILACS, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and SCI-EXPANDED (up to 13 August, 2025), complemented with manual searches. 12,359 articles were screened. Data were synthesised using meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analyses (TSA), and risks of bias and certainty of the evidence were evaluated. <h4>Primary and secondary outcome measures</h4> The primary outcome was autism characteristics. Secondary outcomes were adverse effects, child adaptive functioning, child language, child and parent quality of life, and parental stress. Ten exploratory outcomes were included. <h4>Results</h4> 32 trials (N=1,625) comparing PMIs to usual care, waiting list, or no intervention were included. All trials had a high risk of bias. The multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance was p = 0.013 due to the number of outcomes. Meta-analyses and TSAs showed it could be rejected that PMIs reduced autism characteristics (MD = −0.88; 95% confidence interval −2.92 to 1.15; p = 0.05, 4 trials, N =353, low certainty), child adaptive functioning (7 trials, N =408), child language (4 trials, N =308), or parental stress (7 trials, N =385). Due to insufficient data, the remaining secondary meta-analyses could not be conducted. Meta-analyses of exploratory outcomes showed beneficial effects concerning child behaviour problems and parent sensitivity/synchronicity. <h4>Conclusions</h4> This meta-analysis found no benefits of PMIs on child autism characteristics, child adaptive functioning, child language, or parental stress. Benefits were found in reduction of child behaviour problems and improved parent sensitivity/synchronicity. The evidence remains uncertain, and more trials including outcomes of adverse effects and quality of life are needed. <h4>Trial registration</h4> CRD42022385188 PROSPERO

Background

The study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of parent-mediated interventions compared to usual care in children with autism. This is important as autism interventions often involve family participation, and understanding their impact can guide treatment strategies. The study uses systematic review and meta-analysis methods, which are valuable for synthesizing existing evidence.

Methods

Not reported in abstract.

Results

Not reported in abstract.

Interpretation

Not reported in abstract.

Limitations

  • Not reported in abstract.

Elsewhere in the SS-31 corpus

CStructural and functional characterisation of the dextran utilisome from &lt;i&gt;Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron&lt;/i&gt;.Journal of structural biology: X · 2026 · Not reported in abstract.In vitroC4-oxo-quinoline based fluorescent chemosensors for on-site detection of G-type nerve agent mimic DCP via spectroscopic and theoretical insights.Spectrochimica acta. Part A, Molecular and biomolecular spectroscopy · 2026 · Limit of detection for DCP: 0.14 μM for 6DEQA.In vitroDEffectiveness of virtual reality-based rehabilitation on quality of life and upper extremity functions among stroke survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2026 · SMD = -0.09, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.11, p = .36; low certainty for QoL.reviewBKidney failure risk equation and early renal risk in adults with sickle cell disease: comparison with KDIGO classification using measured GFR.Renal failure · 2026 · 35.7% of participants had moderate-to-high KDIGO renal risk.HumanBAssociation of basal metabolic rate with mortality among cancer survivors: a cohort study emphasizing heterogeneity by gender and age.Annals of medicine · 2026 · Higher BMR was associated with reduced prevalence of all-cause mortality in older survivors aged ≥60 years.HumanBAssessing health beliefs and patient delay among breast cancer patients in West Sumatra, Indonesia.MethodsX · 2026 · Cronbach's α: 0.809-0.871 for the final tool.Human