Real Safety AI Foundation / Research

AI Literacy, Tutoring, and Special Education

Screen-Based Assistive Technology for Children Ages 0-5 with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities

Publisher: Real Safety AI Foundation

Evidence submission.

Written
16 February 2026
Pages
8
Download PDFPlain language slides (PDF)Export BibTeXExport RIS

Abstract

This evidence submission addresses a critical gap in the Department for Education's open call on early years screen time and usage: the systematic exclusion of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) from the research base that informs screen time policy. The evidence presented here, drawn from 80+ peer-reviewed studies including 15+ randomised controlled trials and 20+ systematic reviews, demonstrates that screen-based technology is not merely permissible for young children with disabilities. For many, it is the only means of communication, learning, and social participation available to them. Vanderloo et al. (2025) represents the first systematic review to include children with disabilities in screen time research. The authors found that most prior studies explicitly exclude children with autism, ADHD, intellectual disabilities, and other neurodevelopmental conditions from their samples. This means that the evidence base currently informing screen time guidance does not account for the population most likely to benefit from screen-based interventions, and most likely to be harmed by blanket restrictions.

Plain language slides

First slide of the plain language summary of Screen-Based Assistive Technology for Children Ages 0-5 with Special Educational Needs and DisabilitiesOpen the 12-slide summary (PDF)

Suggested citation

Gilly, Travis. "Screen-Based Assistive Technology for Children Ages 0-5 with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities." Real Safety AI Foundation Evidence Submission, 16 February 2026. https://realsafetyai.org/research/r7yc3x/

Key references (29)

The full list of 80+ studies is available on request.

This list was read from the PDF text. Where the two differ, the PDF is correct.

  1. Vanderloo LM et al. 2025 Screen time among children and youth with disabilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis. DOI: 10.1111/cch.70136
  2. Leonet O et al. 2022 A systematic review of augmentative and alternative communication interventions for children aged from 0 to 6 years. DOI: 10.1044/2022_LSHSS-21-00191
  3. Shin Y, Park EJ, Lee A 2025 Early Intervention for Children With Developmental Disabilities and Their Families via Telehealth: Systematic Review. DOI: 10.2196/66442
  4. Dawson G et al. 2010 Randomized, Controlled Trial of an Intervention for Toddlers With Autism: The Early Start Denver Model. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2009-0958
  5. Naess KAB et al. 2022 A Randomized Trial of the Digital Down Syndrome LanguagePlus (DSL+) Vocabulary Intervention Program. DOI: 10.1177/07419325211058400
  6. AlSoqih et al. 2025 Efficacy of Virtual Reality Interventions for Motor Function Improvement in Cerebral Palsy Patients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14238388
  7. Drager KDR 2023 Systematic review supports that it is never too early to implement AAC intervention for children under six years of age. DOI: 10.1080/17489539.2024.2381883
  8. Jesus LMT et al. 2019 Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial. DOI: 10.1044/2019_jslhr-s-18-0301
  9. Carson K 2020 Can an app a day keep illiteracy away? Piloting the efficacy of Reading Doctor apps for preschoolers with developmental language disorder. DOI: 10.1080/17549507.2019.1667438
  10. Berber G, Cetinkaya MM 2025 Mobile game-based auditory training as an adjunct to aural rehabilitation in preschool children with cochlear implants: a randomised feasibility trial. DOI: 10.1080/14992027.2025.2607535
  11. Blaiser KM et al. 2013 Measuring Costs and Outcomes of Tele-Intervention When Serving Families of Children Who Are Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing. DOI: 10.5195/ijt.2013.6129
  12. Schuelka MJ 2013 Excluding students with disabilities from the culture of achievement: the case of the TIMSS, PIRLS, and PISA. DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2012.708789
  13. Ophir Y et al. 2023 Screen Time and Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.46775
  14. Kent-Walsh J et al. 2025 Generative Language Intervention for Young Children With Down Syndrome Using Augmentative and Alternative Communication: A Randomized Controlled Trial. DOI: 10.1044/2025_LSHSS-24-00117
  15. WHO/UNICEF 2022 Global Report on Assistive Technology. who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451
  16. Stramondo JA 2020 The Right to Assistive Technology. DOI: 10.1007/s11017-020-09527-8
  17. AAP 2025 Prescribing Assistive Technology: Focus on Children With Complex Communication Needs: Clinical Report. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2025-072216
  18. Perochon S et al. 2023 Early detection of autism using digital behavioral phenotyping. Nature Medicine, 29, 2489-2497. DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02574-3
  19. Nicolson A et al. 2012 Impact of assistive technology on family caregivers of children with physical disabilities: a systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 7(5), 345-349. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2012.667194
  20. Barbosa RTA et al. 2018 Augmentative and alternative communication in children with Down's syndrome: a systematic review. BMC Pediatrics, 18, 160. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-018-1144-5
  21. Botelho SMA 2021 Childhood and Assistive Technology: Growing with opportunity, developing with technology. Assistive Technology, 33(sup1), 87-93. DOI: 10.1080/10400435.2021.1971330
  22. Patrus R 2021 Technological abuse through the removal of assistive devices. In: Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse. Routledge.
  23. Delay A et al. 2023 Interventions for children with cerebral visual impairment: A scoping review. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 65(4), 469-478. DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.15431
  24. Abd-Elfattah HM et al. 2024 Effect of touch screen tablet use on fine motor functions in children with hemiparetic cerebral palsy: A randomized controlled trial. NeuroRehabilitation, 55(1), 137-146. DOI: 10.3233/NRE-240134
  25. Karlsson P et al. 2019 Eyes on communication: Trialling eye-gaze control technology in young children with dyskinetic cerebral palsy. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 22(2), 134-140. DOI: 10.1080/17518423.2018.1519609
  26. Lorah ER et al. 2022 A systematic review of research comparing mobile technology speech-generating devices to other AAC modes with individuals with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 34, 1-21. DOI: 10.1007/s10882-021-09803-y
  27. Seager E et al. 2022 A systematic review of speech, language and communication interventions for children with Down syndrome from 0 to 6 years. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 57(2), 441-463. DOI: 10.1111/1460-6984.12699
  28. Smith AL, Hustad KC 2015 AAC and early intervention for children with cerebral palsy: Parent perceptions and child risk factors. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 31(4), 336-350. DOI: 10.3109/07434618.2015.1084373
  29. Zhou X et al. 2024 Digital intervention in children with developmental language disorder: Systematic review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 13(1), e59992. DOI: 10.2196/59992

All research