RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Approaches to improve mental health care for autistic children and young people: a systematic review and meta-analysis
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.11.30.23299246
DO 10.1101/2023.11.30.23299246
A1 Pemovska, Tamara
A1 Loizou, Sofia
A1 Appleton, Rebecca
A1 Spain, Debbie
A1 Stefanidou, Theodora
A1 Kular, Ariana
A1 Cooper, Ruth
A1 Greenburgh, Anna
A1 Griffiths, Jessica
A1 Barnett, Phoebe
A1 Foye, Una
A1 Baldwin, Helen
A1 Minchin, Matilda
A1 Brady, Gráinne
A1 Saunders, Katherine R. K.
A1 Ahmed, Nafiso
A1 Jackson, Robin
A1 Olive, Rachel Rowan
A1 Parker, Jennie
A1 Timmerman, Amanda
A1 Sapiets, Suzi
A1 Driskell, Eva
A1 Chipp, Beverley
A1 Parsons, Bethany
A1 Totsika, Vaso
A1 Mandy, Will
A1 Pender, Richard
A1 Clery, Philippa
A1 Lloyd-Evans, Brynmor
A1 Simpson, Alan
A1 Johnson, Sonia
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/12/01/2023.11.30.23299246.abstract
AB Autistic children and young people (CYP) experience mental health difficulties but face many barriers to accessing and benefiting from mental health care. There is a need to explore strategies in mental health care for autistic CYP to guide clinical practice and future research and support their mental health needs. Our aim was to identify strategies used to improve mental health care for autistic CYP and examine evidence on their acceptability, feasibility, and effectiveness. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out. All study designs reporting acceptability/feasibility outcomes and empirical quantitative studies reporting effectiveness outcomes for strategies tested within mental health care were eligible. We conducted a narrative synthesis and separate meta-analyses by informant (self, parent, clinician). Fifty-seven papers were included, with most investigating cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-based interventions for anxiety and several exploring service-level strategies, such as autism screening tools, clinician training, adaptations regarding organisation of services. Most papers described caregiver involvement in therapy and reported adaptations to communication and intervention content; a few reported environmental adjustments. In the meta-analyses, parent- and clinician-reported outcomes, but not self-reported outcomes, showed with moderate certainty that CBT for anxiety was an effective treatment compared to any comparison condition in reducing anxiety symptoms in autistic individuals. The certainty of evidence for effectiveness, synthesised narratively, ranged from low to moderate. Evidence for feasibility and acceptability tended to be positive. Many identified strategies are simple, reasonable adjustments that can be implemented in services to enhance mental health care for autistic individuals. Notable research gaps persist, however.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis paper presents independent research commissioned and funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme and conducted by the NIHR Mental Health Policy Research Unit (MHPRU). The funder has no role in the study design, data analysis, write-up of the manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Data were collected from publicly available research papers which are referenced.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData were collected from publicly available research papers which are referenced.