A sweeping quantitative examination of scientific literature pertaining to complementary and alternative interventions for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has concluded that a significant majority of these approaches lack robust evidence of effectiveness, with a notable deficit in thorough safety evaluations. This extensive review, a landmark effort by researchers affiliated with Paris Nanterre University, Paris Cité University, and the University of Southampton, meticulously scrutinized a vast repository of data, encompassing 248 meta-analyses that synthesized findings from 200 individual clinical trials involving over 10,000 participants. The findings were published in the esteemed journal Nature Human Behaviour, offering a critical appraisal of the therapeutic landscape beyond conventional medical practices.
The scope of the investigation was broad, focusing on a diverse array of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIMs) modalities commonly explored by individuals and families seeking support for autism. Nineteen distinct types of interventions were subjected to rigorous analysis. This included, but was not limited to, therapies involving animals, acupuncture, the administration of herbal remedies, music-based interventions, probiotic supplements, and Vitamin D supplementation. The researchers aimed to provide a holistic overview of the scientific standing of these varied approaches.
A significant outcome of this research initiative was the concurrent development of an accessible online platform. This digital resource is designed to empower the public, including autistic individuals and their families, by facilitating a clearer understanding of the scientific evidence underpinning various CAIMs, thereby promoting informed decision-making.
The widespread adoption of alternative treatments for autism stems from the complex challenges that individuals on the autism spectrum may encounter. These can include difficulties in social communication and interaction, understanding abstract social cues, managing sensory sensitivities that can lead to overload, navigating unfamiliar environments with a sense of unease, and engaging in characteristic repetitive behaviors. These challenges can profoundly impact daily functioning, social engagement, and overall quality of life. Consequently, the pursuit of interventions that might alleviate these difficulties or enhance well-being is a prevalent concern. Research indicates that a substantial proportion of autistic individuals, potentially as high as 90 percent, have at some point explored at least one CAIM.
Professor Richard Delorme, who leads the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Unit at Robert Debré Hospital in Paris and was involved in the study, highlighted the motivations behind this widespread interest. He stated, "Many parents of autistic children, as well as autistic adults, turn to complementary and alternative medicines hoping they may help without unwanted side effects." However, he stressed the imperative of critical evaluation, adding, "However, it is necessary to carefully consider evidence from rigorous randomized trials before concluding that these treatments should be tried." This sentiment underscores the need for a balanced perspective, acknowledging the desire for relief while prioritizing evidence-based practices.
The methodology employed in this comprehensive review was an umbrella review, a sophisticated research design that consolidates findings from multiple meta-analyses. This approach allows for a broad, overarching assessment of the cumulative evidence on a particular topic, offering a more comprehensive understanding than any single meta-analysis or individual study could provide. Dr. Corentin Gosling, an Associate Professor at Paris Nanterre University and the study’s first author, elaborated on this methodological choice. "Rather than looking at individual trials, we reviewed all the available meta-analyses, which are a compilation of many trials. This allowed us to evaluate the full body of evidence across different treatments," he explained. He further emphasized the practical utility of their work: "Importantly, we also developed a free and easy-to-use online platform, which we will continue to test. Ultimately, we hope this tool will support autistic people and practitioners in choosing together the best treatment."
Upon detailed examination, the review revealed that while a limited number of interventions showed some preliminary indications of potential benefit, the evidence supporting these effects was largely weak or of low methodological quality. This inherent unreliability of the findings makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about their efficacy. A particularly concerning aspect highlighted by the researchers was the inadequate attention paid to safety profiles. The review noted that less than half of the examined treatments had undergone any formal assessment for acceptability, tolerability, or potential adverse events, leaving significant gaps in understanding the risks associated with their use.
Professor Samuele Cortese, an NIHR Research Professor at the University of Southampton and a co-senior author of the study, underscored the critical importance of synthesizing evidence from multiple sources. He articulated, "This study shows that when people want to know whether a treatment is effective, they shouldn’t just look at one single study. It’s essential to consider all the available evidence and how good that evidence is. Drawing conclusions from one low-quality study can be misleading." This statement serves as a potent reminder of the pitfalls of relying on anecdotal evidence or isolated research findings when making decisions about health interventions.
The study, formally titled Complementary, alternative and integrative medicine for autism: an umbrella review and online platform, is now publicly accessible through the Nature Human Behaviour publication. The accompanying online platform, intended as a resource for informed decision-making, can be accessed at https://ebiact-database.com. This research endeavor was made possible through funding provided by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR), a national research agency. The comprehensive nature of this review and the creation of the accessible online tool represent a significant step forward in critically evaluating the landscape of autism treatments and promoting evidence-based practices. The findings serve as a crucial guide for individuals, families, and healthcare professionals navigating the complex world of therapeutic options, emphasizing the paramount importance of scientific rigor and safety in all healthcare decisions.
About the Author
