Social skills interventions for individuals with autism: evaluation for evidence-based practices within a best evidence synthesis framework.

Reichow et al. (2010) hunted for solid proof that social-skills packages work for people with autism. They screened every study they could find and sorted the strong from the weak. The team used strict rules to decide which methods count as 'evidence-based'.

Two methods made the cut. Social-skills groups now qualify as an established evidence-based practice. Video modeling earned the 'promising' label. Other tactics did not reach the bar.

Wang et al. (2013) crunched 115 single-case studies and found a huge average effect (1.40) for social-skills work, backing up the 'established' label. Kokina et al. (2010) ran the numbers on Social Stories the same year and saw only tiny gains, so the review keeps that method off the top tier. Kassardjian et al. (2014) later repeated a head-to-head test: teaching interaction procedure beat Social Stories every time, confirming the ranking. Hutchins et al. (2020) focused on school settings and still found a solid moderate benefit, showing the evidence holds across places.

You can now tell funders and parents that group-based social-skills training is not experimental—it is proven. Start or keep running these groups with confidence. Add video modeling as a warm-up or homework while you gather more data. Skip stand-alone Social Stories if skill acquisition is the main goal; use them only for minor behavior tweaks. Let the established methods steer your treatment plan and your advocacy.