Whipple Jennifer, Schwartzberg Edward Todd
Department of Music Therapy, Charleston Southern University, Charleston, SC, USA.
Department of Music Education and Music Therapy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
J Music Ther. 2024 Dec 3;61(4):386-430. doi: 10.1093/jmt/thae014.
Scientific integrity is fundamental to evidence-based practice (EBP) and essential in music therapy (MT) research and clinical practice. Researchers conducted an integrative review of approaches and interventions employed by music therapists (MTs) with individuals on the autism spectrum in the context of how studies are analyzed by the National Autism Center (NAC) and National Clearinghouse on Autism Evidence and Practice (NCAEP). Researchers identified 880 database records meeting initial search criteria (i.e., autism spectrum disorder, autism, PDD-NOS, MT, and music interventions); 36 studies remained after screening for duplication, topic relevance, and adherence to inclusion criteria. Included studies were published between 1964 and 2021, in English language, in free open-access journals, worldwide; peer reviewed; conducted by MTs; empirical quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods design; intervention-based; and presented separate data for participants on the autism spectrum. Content and quantitative analyses identified deficits in scientific integrity and the following gaps in studies reviewed: Motor Skills and Placement (NAC-defined intervention targets), Computer-based and Songwriting and Composition (MT techniques), and Wellness and Bonny Method of Guided Imagery in Music (clinical approaches); no patterns were evident among NAC Interventions with MT techniques and approaches. Analysis of 5-point Scientific Merit Ratings yielded a mean 2.78 rating. A comparison of NAC and NCAEP terminology (i.e., how MT researchers report independent variables) indicated eight titles mention specific non-music interventions, 19 mention MT, 14 include music-based technique descriptors, and two mention both non-music interventions and MT. Researchers offer guidelines regarding identity-inclusive language, scientific integrity, and clarity of EBPs within MT intervention research with individuals on the autism spectrum.
科学诚信是循证实践（EBP）的基础，在音乐疗法（MT）研究和临床实践中至关重要。研究人员对音乐治疗师（MTs）针对自闭症谱系个体所采用的方法和干预措施进行了综合综述，同时考虑了美国国家自闭症中心（NAC）和美国国家自闭症证据与实践信息交换所（NCAEP）对研究的分析方式。研究人员识别出880条符合初始搜索标准的数据库记录（即自闭症谱系障碍、自闭症、广泛性发育障碍未特定型、MT和音乐干预）；在筛选重复记录、主题相关性和纳入标准后，剩余36项研究。纳入研究发表于1964年至2021年之间，英文，全球范围内的免费开放获取期刊；经过同行评审；由MTs开展；采用实证定量、定性或混合方法设计；基于干预；并针对自闭症谱系的参与者呈现了单独的数据。内容和定量分析确定了科学诚信方面的缺陷以及所审查研究中的以下差距：运动技能与安置（NAC定义的干预目标）、基于计算机的方法以及歌曲创作与作曲（MT技术）、健康与音乐引导意象的邦妮方法（临床方法）；在NAC干预与MT技术和方法之间未发现明显模式。对5分制科学价值评级的分析得出平均评分为2.78。对NAC和NCAEP术语的比较（即MT研究人员如何报告自变量）表明，八项研究标题提及特定的非音乐干预，19项提及MT，14项包括基于音乐的技术描述符，两项既提及非音乐干预又提及MT。研究人员针对自闭症谱系个体的MT干预研究中的身份包容语言、科学诚信和EBP的清晰度提供了指导方针。
