In the recent literature, there is a broad consensus on the effectiveness of Applied Behavior Analysis interventions for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Despite their proven efficacy, research in clinical settings shows that these treatments are not equally effective for all children and the issue of which intervention should be chosen for an individual remains a common dilemma. The current work systematically reviewed studies on predictors and moderators of response to different types of evidence-based treatment for children with ASD. Specifically, our goal was to critically review the relationships between pre-treatment child characteristics and specific treatment outcomes, covering different aspects of functioning (i.e., social, communicative, adaptive, cognitive, motor, global functioning, play, and symptom severity). Our results questioned the binomial “better functioning-better outcome”, emphasizing the complex interplay between pre-treatment child characteristics and treatment outcomes. However, some pre-treatment variables seem to act as prerequisites for a specific treatment, and the issue of “what works for whom and why” remains challenging. Future research should focus on the definition of evidence-based decision-making models that capture those individual factors through which a specific intervention will exert its effects.

BACKGROUND: Videomodeling is an effective technological tool for intervention and rehabilitation of children with autism spectrum disorders in different contexts. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to verify whether a videomodeling intervention is effective for the acquisition of social and emotional behaviour and skills of children with ASD using tablet PC. METHODS: One 6-year-old child with ASD, who does not use verbal communication, was involved in a multiple baseline across behaviours design: the independent variable was the videomodeling intervention, instead the dependent variable was the participant behaviour. Intervention was preceded by a pre-session of Functional Communication training. An intersubject analysis was used to evaluate participant percentage of response through the sessions. RESULTS: The participant showed a marked improvement in his emotional skills. The intersubjective analysis carried out shows the sharp increase in response in many target behaviours from the baseline to the intervention phase. A limitation of the study was the lack of time: there were only two inversion sessions, no follow-up evaluation, no generalization and no double-blind study. CONCLUSIONS: It would be interesting for future research to extend it to everyday life scenarios, to enhance generalization in other contexts, involving a larger number of people with ASD.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract