Improving Communication for Children With Autism: Does Sign Language Work?
EBP Briefs
Schwartz, J. B., & Nye, C. (2007).
EBP Briefs, 1(2), 15-24.
This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the effect of sign language, oral, or signed communication intervention on signed or oral communication in children, 4-18 years old, on the autism spectrum.
Not stated
Not stated (studies included in the review were published from 1978 to 1988)
Experimental group design studies; quasi-experimental group design studies; experimental single subject design studies
8
One experimental design group study comparing speech alone, sign alone, total communication, and alternating sign and speech showed none of the conditions were statistically significant when compared to another. Seven single-subject design studies showed the average PND for oral communication was 60%, for sign language only was 87%, and for sign and speech was 84%. "Although these studies do not provide strong empirical support for the use of sign language intervention to promote communication in children with autism, it is also important to note that no evidence from the studies included in the meta-analysis suggested that using signs alone or in conjunction with speech was harmful or in any way contraindicated" (p. 13). Limitations included "the absence of conclusive group experimental design evidence to corroborate the single subject design findings", and "the absence of a discussion of intervention fidelity in all studies reviewed" (p. 14).
