| Literature DB >> 28260959 |
Abstract
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) affects approximately one in 68 children, substantially affecting the child's ability to acquire social skills. The application of effective interventions to facilitate and develop social skills is essential due to the lifelong impact that social skills may have on independence and functioning. Research indicates that music therapy can improve social outcomes in children with ASD. Outcome measures are primarily assessed using standardized nonmusical scales of social functioning from the parent or clinician perspective. Certified music therapists may also assess musical engagement and outcomes as a part of the individual's profile. These measures provide an assessment of the individual's social functioning within the music therapy session and generalizability to nonmusical settings.Entities:
Keywords: autism spectrum disorder; music therapy; social skills
Year: 2017 PMID: 28260959 PMCID: PMC5325134 DOI: 10.2147/PROM.S106267
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Patient Relat Outcome Meas ISSN: 1179-271X
Range of parental-report tools used to evaluate the effect of music therapy interventions
| Author | Group/individual | Design | Final number of participants | Sex | Age, years | Parent-reported scales used |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allgood | Group with families | One group | N = 4 | F = 2; M = 2 | 4–6 | Interview and focus groups |
| Geretsegger et al | Individual | Feasibility of randomized controlled trial | N = 15; high-dose treatment | F = 4; M = 11 | 4–6 | Social Responsiveness Scale |
| LaGasse | Group | Randomized control trial | N = 17; treatment | F = 4; M = 13 | 6–9 | Social Responsiveness Scale; Autism Treatment Evaluation checklist |
| Thompson et al | Individual with family | Randomized controlled trial | N = 21; treatment (n = 11); control (n=10) | Not reported | 3–6 | Vineland Social–Emotional Childhood Scales (VSEEC); Social Responsiveness Scale – Preschool; MacArthur–Bates Communicative Development Inventories; The Parent–Child Relationship Inventory |
| Thompson and McFerran | Individual with family | One group | N = 11 | Not reported | 3–6 | Interview |
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male.
Range of clinician-based observation tools used to evaluate the effect of music therapy interventions
| Author | Group/individual | Design | Final number of participants | Sex | Age, years | Clinician-based observation scales |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carpente | Individual | Case study | N = 4 | F = 2; M = 2 | 4–8 | Functional Emotional Assessment Scale (FEAS) |
| Kim et al | Individual | Repeated measures within subject design | N = 10 | F = 0; M = 10 | 3–5 | Early Social Communication Scales; Pervasive Developmental Disorder Behavior Inventory-C |
| Geretsegger et al | Individual | Feasibility of randomized controlled trial | N = 15; high-dose treatment | F = 4; M = 11 | 4–6 | Autism Diagnostic Observation Scale – Social Affect |
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male.
Range of clinician-based observation tools used to evaluate the effect of music therapy interventions
| Author | Group/individual | Design | Number of participants | Sex | Age, years | Observation measures |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Finnigan and Starr | Individual | Single case alternating treatment design | N = 1 | F | 3 | Eye contact, turn taking, imitation |
| Kern and Aldridge | Individual | Single system multiple baseline | N = 4 | M = 4 | 3–5 | Play/engagement and interaction with peers |
| Kern et al | Individual | Single system withdrawal design | N = 2 | M = 2 | 3 | Independent and prompted responses |
| Kim et al | Individual | Repeated measures within subject design | N = 10 | M = 10 | 3–5 | Instances of eye contact, as well as turn-taking frequency and duration |
| Kim et al | Individual | Repeated measures within subject design | N = 10 | M = 10 | 3–5 | Motivational responsiveness and social responsiveness |
| LaGasse | Group | Randomized controlled trial | N = 17; treatment | F = 4; M = 13 | 6–9 | Instances of joint attention, initiating, responding, and social eye gaze |
| Pasiali et al | Individual | Case study | N = 3 | F = 1; M = 2 | 7–9 | Behaviors observed to be different for each child, based on needs |
| Vaiouli et al | Individual | Single system multiple baseline design | N = 3 | F = 1; M = 2 | 5–7 | Focus on faces, response to joint attention, and initiation of joint attention |
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male.
Range of music-based tools used to evaluate the effect of music therapy interventions
| Author | Group/individual | Design | Number of participants | Age, years | Sex | Music-centered scale or observation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boso et al | Group | One group | N = 8 | 23–38 | F = 1; M = 7 | Musical skills (playing scales, singing melody, and reproducing rhythm) |
| Kim et al | Individual | Repeated measures within subject design | N = 10 | 3–5 | M = 10 | Musical synchrony (observation) |
| Thompson et al | Individual with family | Randomized controlled trial | N = 21; treatment (n = 11); control (n=10) | 3–6 | Not reported | The Music Therapy Diagnostic Assessment |
Abbreviations: F, female; M, male.