J Autism Dev Disord (2008) 38:568 DOI 10.1007/s10803-007-0472-3
LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Reply to Response to ‘‘Brief Report: The Effects of Tomatis Sound Therapy on Language in Children with Autism’’, July 3, 2007, Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders Blythe A. Corbett
Published online: 6 November 2007 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007
Commentary to: J Autism Dev Disord (2007) DOI 10.1007/s10803-007-0413-1 Dear Editor, We appreciate the opportunity to address the aforementioned Letter to the Editor regarding our manuscript, ‘‘The effects of Tomatis sound therapy on language in children with autism.’’ The authors acknowledge the limitations raised by cross-over designs. As an investigator one makes choices based on the aims, hypotheses, as well as practical issues prior to initiating a study. Since we were investigating a treatment with extremely limited and biased findings, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over investigation was chosen. Furthermore, the study was specifically designed to evaluate the efficacy of Tomatis therapy on the receptive and expressive language functioning in children with autism since proponents of the method claim measurable benefits in these fundamental skills. Additional analyses evaluating other domains of function, using our design and statistical methods, resulted in comparable negative findings. In regards to claims of individual benefit, the study was not designed to be a case study. As such, the reporting of individual results in a group design is unwarranted. If the benefits were as robust as proponents claim, positive
The online version of the original article can be found under doi: 10.1007/s10803-007-0413-1. B. A. Corbett (&) Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, M.I.N.D. Institute, University of California, Davis, 2825, 50th Street, Sacramento, CA 95817, USA e-mail: blythe.corbett@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu
123
findings should be easier to extract from the data. Although larger studies with greater numbers of subjects are always preferred, based on the preliminary results, the current investigative team did not consider it appropriate to conduct an additional or expanded study of the Tomatis method. It is our opinion that the Tomatis method as an intervention for children with autism, must be held up to the same scrutiny and rigor of other treatments and be quantified by standardized procedures not merely testimonials and anecdotal data; hence, the impetus for conducting the study. As such, it is our responsibility as scientists and clinicians to subject any treatment to rigorous examination on behalf of the scientific and autism communities. Ultimately, it is the parents and care providers of children with autism who must determine whether any plausible or modest gains in functioning are worth the expenditure of resources. Nevertheless, we welcome the scrutiny of scientific data and encourage investigators to continue the pursuit of finding efficacious treatments for our children with autism for they are clearly needed and deserved. Best, Blythe A. Corbett, Ph.D. Assistant Professor University of California, Davis