Centre d'Information et de documentation du CRA Rhône-Alpes
CRA
Informations pratiques
-
Adresse
Centre d'information et de documentation
du CRA Rhône-Alpes
Centre Hospitalier le Vinatier
bât 211
95, Bd Pinel
69678 Bron CedexHoraires
Lundi au Vendredi
9h00-12h00 13h30-16h00Contact
Tél: +33(0)4 37 91 54 65
Mail
Fax: +33(0)4 37 91 54 37
-
Détail de l'auteur
Auteur Nicholas MEYER |
Documents disponibles écrits par cet auteur (1)
Faire une suggestion Affiner la recherche
What are we targeting when we treat autism spectrum disorder? A systematic review of 406 clinical trials / Umberto PROVENZANI in Autism, 24-2 (February 2020)
[article]
Titre : What are we targeting when we treat autism spectrum disorder? A systematic review of 406 clinical trials Type de document : Texte imprimé et/ou numérique Auteurs : Umberto PROVENZANI, Auteur ; Laura FUSAR-POLI, Auteur ; Natascia BRONDINO, Auteur ; Stefano DAMIANI, Auteur ; Marco VERCESI, Auteur ; Nicholas MEYER, Auteur ; Matteo ROCCHETTI, Auteur ; Pierluigi POLITI, Auteur Article en page(s) : p.274-284 Langues : Anglais (eng) Mots-clés : autism spectrum disorder core symptoms outcome measures systematic review trials Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : The number of trials aimed at evaluating treatments for autism spectrum disorder has been increasing progressively. However, it is not clear which outcome measures should be used to assess their efficacy, especially for treatments which target core symptoms. The present review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview regarding the outcome measures used in clinical trials for people with autism spectrum disorder. We systematically searched the Web of Knowledge(SM) database between 1980 and 2016 to identify published controlled trials investigating the efficacy of interventions in autism spectrum disorder. We included 406 trials in the final database, from which a total of 327 outcome measures were identified. Only seven scales were used in more than 5% of the studies, among which only three measured core symptoms (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Childhood Autism Rating Scale, and Social Responsiveness Scale). Of note, 69% of the tools were used in the literature only once. Our systematic review has shown that the evaluation of efficacy in intervention trials for autism spectrum disorder relies on heterogeneous and often non-specific tools for this condition. The fragmentation of tools may significantly hamper the comparisons between studies and thus the discovery of effective treatments for autism spectrum disorder. Greater consensus regarding the choice of these measures should be reached. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362361319854641 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=415
in Autism > 24-2 (February 2020) . - p.274-284[article] What are we targeting when we treat autism spectrum disorder? A systematic review of 406 clinical trials [Texte imprimé et/ou numérique] / Umberto PROVENZANI, Auteur ; Laura FUSAR-POLI, Auteur ; Natascia BRONDINO, Auteur ; Stefano DAMIANI, Auteur ; Marco VERCESI, Auteur ; Nicholas MEYER, Auteur ; Matteo ROCCHETTI, Auteur ; Pierluigi POLITI, Auteur . - p.274-284.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Autism > 24-2 (February 2020) . - p.274-284
Mots-clés : autism spectrum disorder core symptoms outcome measures systematic review trials Index. décimale : PER Périodiques Résumé : The number of trials aimed at evaluating treatments for autism spectrum disorder has been increasing progressively. However, it is not clear which outcome measures should be used to assess their efficacy, especially for treatments which target core symptoms. The present review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview regarding the outcome measures used in clinical trials for people with autism spectrum disorder. We systematically searched the Web of Knowledge(SM) database between 1980 and 2016 to identify published controlled trials investigating the efficacy of interventions in autism spectrum disorder. We included 406 trials in the final database, from which a total of 327 outcome measures were identified. Only seven scales were used in more than 5% of the studies, among which only three measured core symptoms (Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule, Childhood Autism Rating Scale, and Social Responsiveness Scale). Of note, 69% of the tools were used in the literature only once. Our systematic review has shown that the evaluation of efficacy in intervention trials for autism spectrum disorder relies on heterogeneous and often non-specific tools for this condition. The fragmentation of tools may significantly hamper the comparisons between studies and thus the discovery of effective treatments for autism spectrum disorder. Greater consensus regarding the choice of these measures should be reached. En ligne : http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1362361319854641 Permalink : https://www.cra-rhone-alpes.org/cid/opac_css/index.php?lvl=notice_display&id=415