Comparaison de l’effet de deux interventions prosociales sur l’évolution des capacités d’identification des expressions faciales et du raisonnement social d’enfants avec un syndrome d’Asperger ou autisme de haut niveau

Social cognition remediation interventions: A systematic mapping review

Background

Impairments in social cognition have been described in several psychiatric and neurological disorders. Given the importance of the relationship between social cognition and functioning and quality of life in these disorders, there is a growing interest in social cognition remediation interventions. The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic mapping review to describe the state of the art in social cognition training and remediation interventions.

Methods

Publications from 2006 to 2016 on social cognition interventions were reviewed in four databases: Scopus, PsycINFO, PubMed and Embase. From the initial result set of 3229 publications, a final total of 241 publications were selected.

Results

The study revealed an increasing interest in social cognition remediation interventions, especially in the fields of psychiatry and psychology, with a gradual growth in the number of publications. These were frequently published in high impact factor journals and underpinned by robust scientific evidence. Most studies were conducted on schizophrenia, followed by autism spectrum disorders. Theory of mind and emotional processing were the focus of most interventions, whilst a limited number of studies addressed attributional bias and social perception. Targeted interventions in social cognition were the most frequent practice in the selected papers, followed by non-specific treatment interventions and broad-based interventions.

Conclusions

Research in social cognition remediation interventions is growing. Further studies are needed on attributional bias and social perception remediation programs, while the comparative efficacy of different interventions also remains unclear.

Interventions based on the Theory of Mind cognitive model for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

BACKGROUND

The 'Theory of Mind' (ToM) model suggests that people with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have a profound difficulty understanding the minds of other people - their emotions, feelings, beliefs, and thoughts. As an explanation for some of the characteristic social and communication behaviours of people with ASD, this model has had a significant influence on research and practice. It implies that successful interventions to teach ToM could, in turn, have far-reaching effects on behaviours and outcome.

OBJECTIVES

To review the efficacy of interventions based on the ToM model for individuals with ASD.

SEARCH METHODS

In August 2013 we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Social Services Abstracts, AutismData, and two trials registers. We also searched the reference lists of relevant papers, contacted authors who work in this field, and handsearched a number of journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Review studies were selected on the basis that they reported on an applicable intervention (linked to ToM in one of four clearly-defined ways), presented new randomised controlled trial data, and participants had a confirmed diagnosis of an autism spectrum disorder. Studies were selected by two review authors independently and a third author arbitrated when necessary.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Risk of bias was evaluated and data were extracted by two review authors independently; a third author arbitrated when necessary. Most studies were not eligible for meta-analysis, the principal reason being mis-matching methodologies and outcome measures. Three small meta-analyses were carried out.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two randomised trials were included in the review (N = 695). Studies were highly variable in their country of origin, sample size, participant age, intervention delivery type, and outcome measures. Risk of bias was variable across categories. There were very few studies for which there was adequate blinding of participants and personnel, and some were also judged at high risk of bias in blinding of outcome assessors. There was also evidence of some bias in sequence generation and allocation concealment. Not all studies reported data that fell within the pre-defined primary outcome categories for the review, instead many studies reported measures which were intervention-specific (e.g. emotion recognition). The wide range of measures used within each outcome category and the mixed results from these measures introduced further complexity when interpreting results.Studies were grouped into four main categories according to intervention target/primary outcome measure. These were: emotion recognition studies, joint attention and social communication studies, imitation studies, and studies teaching ToM itself. Within the first two of these categories, a sub-set of studies were deemed suitable for meta-analysis for a limited number of key outcomes.There was very low quality evidence of a positive effect on measures of communication based on individual results from three studies. There was low quality evidence from 11 studies reporting mixed results of interventions on measures of social interaction, very low quality evidence from four studies reporting mixed results on measures of general communication, and very low quality evidence from four studies reporting mixed results on measures of ToM ability.  The meta-analysis results we were able to generate showed that interventions targeting emotion recognition across age groups and working with people within the average range of intellectual ability had a positive effect on the target skill, measured by a test using photographs of faces (mean increase of 0.75 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 1.29 points, Z = 2.75, P < 0.006, four studies, N = 105). Therapist-led joint attention interventions can promote production of more joint attention behaviours within adult-child interaction (mean increase of 0.55 points, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.99 points, Z = 2.45, P value = 0.01, two studies, N = 88). Further analysis undermines this conclusion somewhat by demonstrating that there was no clear evidence that intervention can have an effect on joint attention initiations as measured using a standardised assessment tool (mean increase of 0.23 points, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.94 points, Z = 0.63, P value = 0.53, three studies, N = 92). No adverse effects were apparent.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While there is some evidence that ToM, or a precursor skill, can be taught to people with ASD, there is little evidence of maintenance of that skill, generalisation to other settings, or developmental effects on related skills. Furthermore, inconsistency in findings and measurement means that evidence has been graded of 'very low' or 'low' quality and we cannot be confident that suggestions of positive effects will be sustained as high-quality evidence accumulates. Further longitudinal designs and larger samples are needed to help elucidate both the efficacy of ToM-linked interventions and the explanatory value of the ToM model itself. It is possible that the continuing refinement of the ToM model will lead to better interventions which have a greater impact on development than those investigated to date.

Cochrane review: social skills groups for people aged 6 to 21 with autism spectrum disorders (ASD)

BACKGROUND

Since autism was first described, major difficulties in social interaction have been a defining feature of individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Social skills groups are a common intervention for individuals with ASD. Although a frequently recommended practice, the few studies that have addressed the efficacy of social skills groups have shown mixed results.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of social skills groups for improving social competence, social communication, and quality of life for people with ASD who are six to 21 years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in December 2011: CENTRAL (2011 Issue 4), MEDLINE (1948 to November Week 3, 2011), EMBASE (1980 to Week 50, 2011), PsycINFO (1887 to December Week 2, 2011), CINAHL (1937 to current), ERIC (1966 to current), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to current), OCLC WorldCat (12 December 2011), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 16 December 2011), and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (20 December 2011). We also searched the reference lists of published papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing treatment (social skills groups) with a control group who were not receiving the treatment for participants aged six to 21 years with ASD. The control group could be no intervention, wait list, or treatment as usual. Outcomes sought were standardized measures of social competence, social communication, quality of life, emotion recognition, and any other specific behaviors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and appraised studies for inclusion and assessed the risk of bias in each included study. All outcome data were continuous and standardized mean difference effect sizes (ES) with small sample correction were calculated. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs evaluating the effects of social skills groups in 196 participants with ASD aged 6 to 21 years old. The results show there is some evidence that social skills groups improve overall social competence (ES = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.78, P = 0.003) and friendship quality (ES = 0.41, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.81, P = 0.04) for this population. No differences were found between treatment and control groups in relation to emotional recognition (ES = 0.34, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.88, P = 0.21) assessed in two studies or social communication as related to the understanding of idioms (ES = 0.05, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.72, P = 0.89), which was assessed in only one study. Two additional quality of life outcomes were evaluated, with results of single studies suggesting decreases in loneliness (ES = -0.66, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.17) but no effect on child or parental depression. No adverse events were reported. Given the nature of the intervention and the selected outcome measures, the risk of performance and detection bias are high. There is limited generalizability from the studies as they were all conducted in the US; they focused mainly on children aged 7 to 12, and the participants were all of average or above average intelligence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that social skills groups can improve social competence for some children and adolescents with ASD. More research is needed to draw more robust conclusions, especially with respect to improvements in quality of life.

Social skills groups for people aged 6 to 21 with autism spectrum disorders (ASD)

BACKGROUND

Since autism was first described, major difficulties in social interaction have been a defining feature of individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Social skills groups are a common intervention for individuals with ASD. Although a frequently recommended practice, the few studies that have addressed the efficacy of social skills groups have shown mixed results.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of social skills groups for improving social competence, social communication, and quality of life for people with ASD who are six to 21 years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases in December 2011: CENTRAL (2011 Issue 4), MEDLINE (1948 to November Week 3, 2011), EMBASE (1980 to Week 50, 2011), PsycINFO (1887 to December Week 2, 2011), CINAHL (1937 to current), ERIC (1966 to current), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to current), OCLC WorldCat (12 December 2011), Social Science Citation Index (1970 to 16 December 2011), and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (20 December 2011). We also searched the reference lists of published papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing treatment (social skills groups) with a control group who were not receiving the treatment for participants aged six to 21 years with ASD. The control group could be no intervention, wait list, or treatment as usual. Outcomes sought were standardized measures of social competence, social communication, quality of life, emotion recognition, and any other specific behaviors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and appraised studies for inclusion and assessed the risk of bias in each included study. All outcome data were continuous and standardized mean difference effect sizes (ES) with small sample correction were calculated. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis where possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs evaluating the effects of social skills groups in 196 participants with ASD aged 6 to 21 years old. The results show there is some evidence that social skills groups improve overall social competence (ES = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.78, P = 0.003) and friendship quality (ES = 0.41, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.81, P = 0.04) for this population. No differences were found between treatment and control groups in relation to emotional recognition (ES = 0.34, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.88, P = 0.21) assessed in two studies or social communication as related to the understanding of idioms (ES = 0.05, 95% CI -0.63 to 0.72, P = 0.89), which was assessed in only one study. Two additional quality of life outcomes were evaluated, with results of single studies suggesting decreases in loneliness (ES = -0.66, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.17) but no effect on child or parental depression. No adverse events were reported.Given the nature of the intervention and the selected outcome measures, the risk of performance and detection bias are high. There is limited generalizability from the studies as they were all conducted in the US; they focused mainly on children aged 7 to 12, and the participants were all of average or above average intelligence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that social skills groups can improve social competence for some children and adolescents with ASD. More research is needed to draw more robust conclusions, especially with respect to improvements in quality of life.

[Anxiety in children and adolescents with pervasive developmental disorder without mental retardation: review of literature]

OBJECTIVE

Anxiety is highly prevalent in Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) without mental retardation but is too often misdiagnosed. The authors suggest a critical review of current data of the PDD without mental retardation in children and adolescents, in order to summarize research published in this field. After describing specific features, this article tackles the issue of prevalence of anxiety among this population, then deals with present-time assessment and treatments of comorbid anxiety.

METHODS

This review was based on a systematic search of the main online databases (Science Direct, PsychInfo, Medline and Pubmed) in order to compile surveys published on Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism-related anxiety among children and adolescents. This study focuses on papers published between 1995 and 2010, using strict diagnostic criteria for anxiety and PDD, and a controlled group, with the exception of pharmacological studies because none are controlled. We found seven studies assessing the prevalence of anxiety among children and adolescents with PDD, four assessment tools and 12 treatments.

RESULTS

Anxiety disorders were shown in 42% of children and adolescents with PDD without mental retardation. This disorder is related to age and level of cognitive functioning and is likely to affect PDD without mental retardation as children and adolescents with anxiety disorder without PDD. This review highlights a major problem: assessment of anxiety in PDD without mental retardation. Actually, only two PDD adapted instruments have been found: the Autism Co-Morbidity Interview Present and Lifetime Version (ACI-PI) and the Stress Survey Schedule (SSS) for persons with autism. Such tools being methodologically limited, the diagnosis of anxiety disorder is all the more difficult to establish. Consequently, considering suitable treatment is not always proposed. Recent surveys show how profitable pharmacological treatment and behavioral intervention like Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT) or psychosocial treatments are. However, important methodological limitations are evoked: there is no control study assessing the efficiency of a pharmacological treatment in Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism. Besides, the research on how profitable cognitive and behavioral treatment is, gives heterogeneous results. Finally, social skills' training does not treat anxiety disorder directly, but skills abilities that are the most important disabilities in PDD without mental retardation. Therefore, authors advocate adapting treatment in order to treat anxiety disorder.

CONCLUSION

The research revealed an important need to create new assessment instruments suitable to PDD without mental retardation in order to facilitate the co-morbidity diagnosis. This survey also underlines the necessity to develop controlled research testing the efficiency of such treatments as pharmacological ones, cognitive and behavioral therapies as well as social skills training.