Technology-based versus traditional reading comprehension interventions for autistic children and adolescents: a meta-analysis

Reading comprehension difficulties are common among autistic children and adolescents, yet it remains unclear whether intervention effectiveness differs by delivery modality. This meta-analysis synthesised quantitative evidence comparing technology-based and traditional reading comprehension interventions for autistic individuals. Following the PRISMA guidelines, systematic searches of EBSCO, ERIC, and PubMed identified fifteen studies contributing quantitative data to the meta-analysis. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted separately for between-subjects and within-subjects designs. Between-subjects analyses indicated small but significant positive effects of reading comprehension interventions relative to control conditions, with no statistically significant difference between technology-based and traditional modalities. Within-subjects analyses showed meaningful improvements relative to baseline for both technology-based (g = 0.47) and traditional interventions (g = 0.68), again with no significant modality differences. These findings suggest that delivery modality alone does not moderate intervention effectiveness, underscoring the importance of instructional quality and individualization in supporting reading comprehension for autistic children and adolescents.