Robot-assisted intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder Mental and Behavioural Disorders
Conditions
Interventions
A web-based service was adopted to randomize children into two groups
a social robot-assisted therapy group (NAO group) and a therapist only psychosocial intervention group (control group). Treatment allocations remained concealed from the main researchers until recruit
control skills e.g. self-regulation and cognitive skills e.g. joint attention, memory and imitation.
Sponsors
Papageorgiou General Hospital
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: 1. Ages 6 –12 years 2. Confirmed ASD diagnosis 3. IQ over 70 4. Greek-language comprehension 5. CARS-2 from 30 to 37 6. ADI-R: social interaction 10, communication 8 (when verbal ability present) or 7 (verbal ability absent), stereotypic behaviour 3 7. Parents/caregivers written informed consent
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Co-morbidity with another neurodevelopmental syndrome, photosensitive epilepsy, co-existing disability, organ failure, or other psychiatric disorder that affects functionality or prevents the child from moving freely. 2. Medication that reduces or affects functioning, causes drowsiness, physical symptoms, cognitive impairment, or affects in any way the areas of investigation of the study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| At baseline, at the end of the interventions and once again after a 3 month period. 1. Autism diagnosis: Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS-2; ), and Autism Diagnostic Interview–Revised (ADI-R; ) were used to confirm autism diagnosis, distinguish autism from other developmental disorders, and plan treatment by personalizing the intervention’s sessions. 2. Neuropsychological testing: Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WIPPSI; ), and Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-5; ) were used to exclude children with cognitive deficits and provide information relevant to cognitive functioning. 3. The Developmental Neuropsychological Assessment (NEPSY–II; Korkman et al., 2007) was used to explore neurocognitive performance. 4. The NEPSY-II subtests of Affect Recognition and Theory of Mind, which form part of the Social Perception domain, were administered to assess the ability to identify emotions, and the ability to understand other’s beliefs, intentions, thoughts, and feelings. 5. Parent/Teacher reporting: The Acchenbach System of Empirically Based Assessment (ASEBA; Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001), and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Cas-Goodman, 1997) were filled out by parents and teachers to assess symptoms, academic difficulties, peer relationship problems, and prosocial behavior problems. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| At the end of the interventions: 1. A semi-structured parent interview e.g. questions “name three positive characteristics of your child”; “what is his/her biggest difficulty in everyday life?” was developed by the authors to further adapt the intervention to each child’s individual needs. 2. A 9-item satisfaction scale (e.g. items “I am satisfied with the quality of the intervention; I would recommend the intervention to other parents”) , rated on a 10 point Likert scale form “not at all agree” to “totally agree”, was developed by the authors to explore satisfaction. 3. Children’s satisfaction was measured by a questionnaire with 7 closed questions (e.g. items “I feel better since I've been coming here”) rated on a 5 point faces scale (with the first face representing “zero satisfaction” and the fifth face representing “total satisfaction”) and 3 open questions in the form of sentence completion (i.e “I liked most…”; «I disliked most…”; “My favourite game with the robot was…”). | — |
Countries
Greece
Outcome results
None listed