Bachelor's degree or higher
60%
Whitehouse, A. J., Varcin, K. J., Pillar, S., Billingham, W., Alvares, G. A., Barbaro, J., ... & Hudry, K. (2021). Effect of preemptive intervention on developmental outcomes among infants showing early signs of autism: a randomized clinical trial of outcomes to diagnosis. JAMA Pediatrics, 175(11), e213298-e213298.
Peer Reviewed
Study design characteristics contributing to rating
| Design | Attrition | Baseline equivalence | Confounding factors? | Valid, reliable measures? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Randomized controlled trial | Low |
Not assessed for randomized controlled trials with low attrition |
No |
Yes, details reported below for findings on valid, reliable outcomes that otherwise rate at least moderate |
Notes from the review of this manuscript
HomVEE calculations for statistical significance are used because the study reported statistical significance using one-sided p-values. Several findings in this study received a low rating due to high attrition and because they did not satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement: the Autism Observation Scale for Infants, the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories, and the Parenting Sense of Competence scale.
Child Development and School Readiness
| Outcome Measure | Timing of Follow-Up | Rating | Direction of Effect | Effect Size (Absolute Value) | Stastical Significance | Sample Size | Sample Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant attentiveness | Treatment end point (6 months after baseline) | High | 0.24 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.24 | 94 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 | |
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant attentiveness | 12 months after baseline | High | 0.34 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.12 | 84 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 | |
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant attentiveness | 24 months after baseline | High | 0.11 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.61 | 80 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 | |
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant positive affect | Treatment end point (6 months after baseline) | High | 0.49 | Statistically significant, p = 0.02 | 94 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 | |
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant positive affect | 12 months after baseline | High | 0.02 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.94 | 84 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 | |
| Manchester Assessment of Caregiver-Infant Interaction (MACI): Infant positive affect | 24 months after baseline | High | 0.13 | Not statistically significant, p = 0.56 | 80 parent/child dyads | BASIS-VIPP vs. usual care RCT, Australia, 2016-2018 |
This study included participants from the following locations:
- State not reported or international
International Locations
Australia
Study Participants
The study invited families with an infant from 9 to 15 months who displayed at least three behavioral characteristics associated with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) to participate. Families were not eligible if their infant had any comorbidity that could affect neurological or developmental abilities or if at least one caregiver did not speak English. The study randomly assigned eligible families to either the iBASIS-Video Interaction to Promote Positive Parenting (iBASIS-VIPP) home visiting intervention plus usual care or usual care only. Of the 171 infants assessed for eligibility, 104 were eligible and randomly assigned to condition, with 51 assigned to iBASIS-VIPP and 53 to usual care only. Infants were 9 to 15 months at enrollment and 33 to 39 months at the latest follow-up in the study (24 months after enrollment). Most infants (76 percent) were male and living with both biological parents (98 percent). Most study households (82 percent) had annual incomes over $50,000; more than half of mothers had a university degree. The authors did not report the race or ethnicity of participants.
Setting
The study took place in Perth and Melbourne, Australia.
Intervention condition
Note: Navigate to the model page for more information about the home visiting model. See the source manuscript for more information about how the model was implemented in this study.
Comparison Conditions
Families assigned to the comparison condition did not receive iBASIS-VIPP. They continued to receive usual community care for infants at risk of ASD. This comprised services recommended by health professionals within the local community, including a range of allied health services, comprehensive autism interventions, or no services.
Subgroups examined
• No sibling with ASD • Sibling with ASD
Funding Sources
The research was supported by Award Numbers 1077966 and 1173896 from Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council and by the Telethon Kids Institute.