For a child, being unsteady on their feet isn't just about sports—it can make walking, playing, and navigating the world feel harder. This is a common concern for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). A major review of 34 studies, involving over 1,200 kids, set out to compare their balance to that of their typically developing peers. The findings show a clear pattern: kids with ASD had poorer static and dynamic balance. This was true whether clinicians used simple observational tests or more precise force platforms that measure tiny body sways. The high-tech tools revealed even larger differences, particularly in how much a child's body moves from side-to-side and front-to-back while trying to stand still. The researchers note the overall certainty of this evidence is low to very low, meaning more high-quality studies are needed. But the consistent signal across many studies points to balance as a significant area of difficulty. Understanding this helps explain why some daily tasks might be challenging and underscores the importance of assessing balance as part of care.
Meta-analysis: Children with ASD show poorer balance vs. TD peers, SMD -0.66 with observational toolsDo kids with autism have more trouble with balance? A review of 34 studies suggests they do
AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work
This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted following PRISMA guidelines, compared static and dynamic balance in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) versus typically developing (TD) peers and identified the tools most used for assessment. The analysis included 34 studies in the descriptive synthesis and 16 in the meta-analyses, encompassing 1278 total participants (612 with ASD, 666 TD). Inclusion criteria focused on studies assessing static or dynamic balance in children aged 6-18 with ASD using validated observational or instrumental tools and including a TD group. Observational tools (e.g., MABC-2, BOT-2) revealed significantly poorer balance in ASD participants, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.66 (95% CI: -1.07 to -0.25; p = 0.002). Force platform assessments demonstrated larger differences across various postural sway measures. Specific SMDs for force platform outcomes were: mediolateral displacement on a stable surface (eyes open SMD = 0.83, eyes closed SMD = 0.56), anteroposterior displacement on a stable surface (eyes open SMD = 0.97, eyes closed SMD = 0.27), center of mass (COM) displacement area (SMD = 1.15-7.72 depending on condition), and COM velocity (SMD = 1.00-3.23 depending on condition). Heterogeneity across studies ranged from moderate to very high (I² = 0-98%). Sensitivity analyses indicated that some effect estimates, particularly for COM displacement area, were influenced by individual studies. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low to very low according to the GRADE assessment. The authors conclude that children with ASD may exhibit poorer static and dynamic balance compared to TD peers and that further high-quality studies are needed.