The role of augmentative and alternative communication for children with autism: current status and future trends
AAC jump-starts requesting in minimally verbal kids with autism, and newer tricks like muting the device can grow natural speech too.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team looked at 17 earlier reviews about AAC for kids with autism.
They wanted to know how well AAC helps these children ask for things.
All studies together covered more than 600 minimally verbal children.
What they found
AAC worked for teaching first requests in almost every review.
Kids learned to tap pictures, press buttons, or hand over symbols to get toys, food, or help.
The authors say the proof is thin: few big studies, narrow goals, short follow-ups.
How this fits with other research
Bishop et al. (2020) and Muharib et al. (2021) echo the same message: echoic prompts plus AAC can spark spoken words.
Kaneda et al. (2025) flips the script: turning OFF the device voice while keeping the screen boosted real speech in three ASD/ID kids.
These newer trials extend Iacono’s call for tighter methods and show speech can grow without dropping AAC.
Why it matters
You can start AAC today with confidence it teaches first requests.
Pair the device with echoic prompts and save your biggest reinforcers for any vocal try.
If the child leans on the voice output, mute it briefly and delay the reward—you may hear new words while the device stays in play.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →During snack, turn off the SGD voice, wait three seconds, then deliver the cracker for any vocal attempt—keep the screen visible so the child can still tap if needed.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions are used for children with autism, often as stand-alone communication interventions for those who are minimally verbal. Our aim was to synthesize the evidence for AAC interventions for children (up to 21 years), and then consider the role of AAC within established, comprehensive, evidence-based autism interventions targeting learning across multiple developmental domains. We completed a systematic search of three databases (OVID Medline, PsycINFO, ERIC) as well as forward citation and hand searches to identify systematic reviews of AAC intervention efficacy research including children with autism, published between 2000 and March 2016 in peer-reviewed journals. Data pertaining to the quality indicators of included studies, effect sizes for intervention outcomes, and evidence for effectiveness were extracted for descriptive analysis. The search yielded 17 systematic reviews. Most provided indicators of research quality for included studies, of which only relatively few provided conclusive results. Communication targets tended to be focused on teaching children to make requests. Still, effect size measures for included studies indicated that AAC was effective to highly effective. There is growing evidence for the potential benefits of AAC for children with autism, but there is a need for more well-designed studies and broader, targeted outcomes. Furthermore, a lack of evidence for the role of AAC within comprehensive intervention programs may account for a tendency by autism researchers and practitioners to neglect this intervention. Attempts to compare evidence for AAC with other interventions for children with autism, including those in which the use of AAC is delayed or excluded in pursuit of speech-only communication, must take into account the needs of children with the most significant learning needs. These children pose the greatest challenges to achieving large and consistent intervention effects, yet stand to gain the most from AAC interventions.
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, 2016 · doi:10.2147/NDT.S95967