Cited by 350Autism Spectrum Disorder ResearchBehavioral and Psychological StudiesChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues

Early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) for young children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD).

Open access
Reichow, Brian, Hume, Kara, Barton, Erin E, Boyd, Brian A·2018·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Background The rising prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD) increases the need for evidence‐based behavioral treatments to lessen the impact of symptoms on children's functioning. At present, there are no curative or psychopharmacological therapies to effectively treat all symptoms of the disorders. Early intensive behavioral intervention (EIBI) is a treatment based on the principles of applied behavior analysis. Delivered for multiple years at an intensity of 20 to 40 hours per week, it is one of the more well‐established treatments for ASD. This is an update of a Cochrane review last published in 2012. Objectives To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of EIBI in increasing functional behaviors and skills, decreasing autism severity, and improving intelligence and communication skills for young children with ASD. Search methods We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 12 additional electronic databases and two trials registers in August 2017. We also checked references and contacted study authors to identify additional studies. Selection criteria Randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi‐RCTs, and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) in which EIBI was compared to a no‐treatment or treatment‐as‐usual control condition. Participants must have been less than six years of age at treatment onset and assigned to their study condition prior to commencing treatment. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We synthesized the results of the five studies using a random‐effects model of meta‐analysis, with a mean difference (MD) effect size for outcomes assessed on identical scales, and a standardized mean difference (SMD) effect size (Hedges' g) with small sample correction for outcomes measured on different scales. We rated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Main results We included five studies (one RCT and four CCTs) with a total of 219 children: 116 children in the EIBI groups and 103 children in the generic, special education services groups. The age of the children ranged between 30.2 months and 42.5 months. Three of the five studies were conducted in the USA and two in the UK, with a treatment duration of 24 months to 36 months. All studies used a treatment‐as‐usual comparison group. Primary outcomes We found evidence at post‐treatment that EIBI improves adaptive behaviour (MD 9.58 (assessed using Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (VABS) Composite; normative mean = 100, normative SD = 15), 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.57 to 13.60, P < 0.001; 5 studies, 202 participants; low‐quality evidence; lower values indicate positive effects). We found no evidence at post‐treatment that EIBI improves autism symptom severity (SMD −0.34, 95% CI −0.79 to 0.11, P = 0.14; 2 studies, 81 participants; very low‐quality evidence). No adverse effects were reported across studies. Secondary outcomes We found evidence at post‐treatment that EIBI improves IQ (MD 15.44 (assessed using standardized IQ tests; scale 0 to 100, normative SD = 15), 95% CI 9.29 to 21.59, P < 0.001; 5 studies, 202 participants; low‐quality evidence) and expressive (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.90, P = 0.01; 4 studies, 165 participants; low‐quality evidence) and receptive (SMD 0.55, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.87, P = 0.001; 4 studies, 164 participants; low‐quality evidence) language skills. We found no evidence at post‐treatment that EIBI improves problem behaviour (SMD −0.58, 95% CI −1.24 to 0.07, P = 0.08; 2 studies, 67 participants; very low‐quality evidence). Authors' conclusions There is weak evidence that EIBI may be an effective behavioral treatment for some children with ASD; the strength of the evidence in this review is limited because it mostly comes from small studies that are not of the optimum design. Due to the inclusion of non‐randomized studies, there is a high risk of bias and we rated the overall quality of evidence as 'low' or 'very low' using the GRADE system, meaning further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. It is important that providers of EIBI are aware of the current evidence and use clinical decision‐making guidelines, such as seeking the family's input and drawing upon prior clinical experience, when making recommendations to clients on the use EIBI. Additional studies using rigorous research designs are needed to make stronger conclusions about the effects of EIBI for children with ASD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd009260.pub3

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Bayley N. Bayley Scales of Infant Development: Manual. 2nd Edition. San Antonio (TX): The Psychological Corporation, 1993.
  2. Bzoch KR, League R. Receptive-Expressive Emergent Language Scale. 2nd Edition. Austin (TX): PRO-ED, 1991.
  3. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG, editor(s). Chapter 9: Anaysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In: Higgins JPT, Churchill R, Chandler J, Cumpston MS, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.2.0 (updated June 2017). Cochrane, 2017. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook.
  4. Dunn 1997a Dunn LM, Dunn LM. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III. 3rd Edition. Circle Pines (MN): American Guidance Service, 1997.
  5. Dunn 1997b Dunn LM, Dunn LM, Whetton C, Burley J. The British Picture Vocabulary Scale. 2nd Edition. Windsor (BRK): NFER-Nelson, 1997.
  6. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ, Altman DG, editor(s). Chapter 16: Special topics in statistics. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
  7. Higgins JPT, Altman DG, Sterne JAC, editor(s). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Churchill R, Chandler J, Cumpston MS, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.2.0 (updated June 2017). Cochrane, 2017. Available from training.cochrane.org/handbook.
  8. Lowe M, Costello AJ. Symbolic Play Test: Second Edition. Windsor (BRK): NFER-Nelson, 1988.
  9. DocType=All document types; Language=All languages; Conference Proceedings Citation Index -Social Sciences & Humanities Web of Science #7 AND #6 DocType=All document types; Language=All languages; #

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reichow, B., Hume, K., Barton, E. E., & Boyd, B. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Florida (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-05-09
Volume
2018
Issue
10
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
OpenAlex
W3193163432
Cited by
350
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 41 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 46 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
3.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Child Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Keywords
early intensive behavioral intervention, autism spectrum disorder, young children, applied behavior analysis, adaptive behavior, language development, communication skills, intellectual functioning, autism severity, special education services, treatment effectiveness, Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, early intervention, quality of evidence, treatment as usual comparison

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review