A massive scientific review put alternative autism therapies to the test

The study was led by researchers from Paris Nanterre University, Paris Cité University, and the University of Southampton and published in Nature Human Behaviour. It examined 248 meta analyses, drawing on results from 200 clinical trials that together involved more than 10,000 participants.

What Treatments Were Examined

The researchers focused on complementary, alternative and integrative medicines (CAIMs) used to treat autism. In total, they evaluated 19 different types of interventions. These included animal assisted therapies, acupuncture, herbal medicine, music therapy, probiotics, and Vitamin D supplementation.

Alongside the analysis, the research team developed an online platform designed to help the public explore the scientific evidence behind different CAIMs more easily.

Why These Treatments Are Widely Used

Autistic people may experience challenges with communication, understanding others’ thoughts or emotions, managing sensory overload, coping with unfamiliar environments, and engaging in repetitive behaviors. These difficulties can affect daily life and overall wellbeing.

As a result, interest in alternative treatments is widespread. Studies suggest that up to 90 percent of autistic individuals report having tried at least one CAIM at some point in their lives.

“Many parents of autistic children, as well as autistic adults, turn to complementary and alternative medicines hoping they may help without unwanted side effects,” says Professor Richard Delorme, Head of the Child and Adolescent Psychiatry Unit at Robert Debré Hospital in Paris.

“However, it is necessary to carefully consider evidence from rigorous randomized trials before concluding that these treatments should be tried.”

How the Evidence Was Evaluated

To assess the full scope of existing research, the team conducted an umbrella review, a method that combines findings from multiple meta analyses to provide an overall big picture assessment.

Dr. Corentin Gosling, Associate Professor at the Paris Nanterre University and first author of the study, explains: “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.

“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.”

Weak Evidence and Limited Safety Data

Although a small number of treatments showed signs of potential benefit, most were backed by weak or low quality evidence, making the reported effects unreliable. The researchers also raised concerns about safety, noting that fewer than half of the treatments had been assessed for acceptability, tolerability, or adverse events.

Professor Samuele Cortese, NIHR Research Professor at the University of Southampton and co senior author, emphasized the importance of looking beyond individual studies. “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.”

Study Details and Funding

The study Complementary, alternative and integrative medicine for autism: an umbrella review and online platform is published in Nature Human Behaviour and is available online.

The online platform is available at: https://ebiact-database.com

The research was funded by Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR).