Auditory Integration Training and Autism Ranking:

Future Research

Summary of Existing Research

There is a limited amount of high-quality research evidence (seven group studies) and a limited amount of low-quality research (six single-case design studies with three or more participants) into the use of the different forms of auditory integration training for autistic people.

• There is no high-quality research evidence to suggest that any form of auditory integration training improves the core symptoms of autism.
• There is some high-quality research evidence to suggest that the Bérard Method does not improve auditory processing in autistic people.
• There is insufficient evidence to determine if the Tomatis method improves auditory processing in autistic people.
• There is insufficient evidence to determine if auditory integration training provides any other benefits to autistic people.

Recommendations for Future Research

We agree with the recommendations from the last Cochrane review on this topic, Sinha et al (2011), which reported

“Given the lack of evidence that auditory integration training (AIT) or other sound therapies are effective as a treatment for autism, future research is discouraged. However, we suggest that any further trials of AIT should build on existing evidence and provide high level evidence about whether this treatment is effective for outcomes that are relevant to individuals with ASD.

To provide this level of evidence, future trials should:

1. use gold-standard criteria for diagnosing autism, so that groups can be compared;

2. use sample sizes capable of detecting differences, if these exist;

3. use outcome measures that are valid and clinically meaningful;

4. present information in a way that is accepted for randomised control trials;

5. consider the effect of intellectual ability, age of participant at treatment, severity of symptoms and other potential subgroup variations so that clinically meaningful information is provided;

6. collect information about potential confounders, such as other therapy, so between-group equivalence can be established.”

Updated

16 Jun 2022

Last Review

01 Jul 2019

Next Review

01 Nov 2024