Portage and Autism Ranking:

Status Research

Cameron 1997, states that ‘...research relating to positive outcomes of families receiving a Portage service has been consistently reported over the past two decades’

However two systematic reviews of the use of portage for a range of children with developmental disabilities are less positive. For example

Brue and Oakland (2001) stated that 'Empirical evidence was available from few studies. In addition, small sample sizes, brief duration of interventions, lack of control groups, restricted dependent measures and lack of follow-up studies precluded an appropriate evaluation of the Portage Guide's effects. Research that overcomes these and other methodological problems is needed. Lacking suitable evidence, professionals are encouraged to be conservative when discussing the Portage Guide's beneficial effects.'

Sturmey (1986) stated that 'A wider range of dependent variables is needed to assess more fully the impact of Portage on both the child and the family. As yet no data are available on long‐term effects of Portage. The case is made for viewing Portage as one amongst several service options available for developmentally delayed preschool children and their families. '

There are limitations to all of the individual research studies on this topic that we have identified to date.

For example, none of the studies used a blinded, randomised controlled format.  The study by Smith, Goddard and Fluck (2004) provided insufficient data about the characteristics of the participants, the intervention used, and the outcomes of the intervention. This was largely because the focus of the study was on a different intervention.

For a comprehensive list of potential flaws in research studies, please see ‘Why some autism research studies are flawed’.

Updated

17 Jun 2022

Last Review

01 Jan 2017

Next Review

01 May 2023