↓ Skip to main content

The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for anxiety in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
16 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for anxiety in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13034-015-0054-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ance Kreslins, Ashley E. Robertson, Craig Melville

Abstract

Anxiety is a common problem in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This meta-analysis aimed to systematically evaluate the evidence for the use of psychosocial interventions to manage anxiety in this population. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) was the primary intervention modality studied. A comprehensive systematic search and study selection process was conducted. Separate statistical analyses were carried out for clinician-, parent-, and self-reported outcome measures. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by removing any outlying studies and any studies that did not use a CBT intervention. A subgroup analysis was performed to compare individual and group delivery of treatment. Ten randomised control trials involving a total of 470 participants were included. The overall SMD was d = 1.05 (95 % CI 0.45, 1.65; z = 3.45, p = 0.0006) for clinician- reported outcome measures; d = 1.00 (95%CI 0.21, 1.80; z = 2.47, p = 0.01) for parent-reported outcome measures; and d = 0.65 (95%CI -0.10, 1.07; z = 1.63, p = 0.10) for self-reported outcome measures. Clinician- and parent-reported outcome measures showed that psychosocial interventions were superior to waitlist and treatment-as-usual control conditions at post-treatment. However, the results of self-reported outcome measures failed to reach significance. The sensitivity analyses did not significantly change these results and the subgroup analysis indicated that individual treatment was more effective than group treatment. The main limitations of this review were the small number of included studies as well as the clinical and methodological variability between studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
Unknown 240 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 16%
Researcher 33 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 46 19%
Unknown 58 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 106 43%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 9%
Social Sciences 15 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 5%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 66 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 March 2021.
All research outputs
#2,244,725
of 23,322,966 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#97
of 672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,446
of 265,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,966 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.