Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has become a critical public health issue that affects more than 78 million people. In many recent studies, the authors have demonstrated that equine-assisted activities and therapies (EAATs) can substantially improve the social and behavioral skills of children with ASD. However, the qualities of the studies differ, and some authors reached opposite conclusions. In this review, we systematically and objectively examined the effectiveness of EAATs for people with ASD, combining both qualitative and quantitative methods. We searched five databases (PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, ProQuest, and MEDLINE) and added relevant references, and we identified 25 articles for data extraction and analysis. According to our results, EAAT programs can substantially improve the social and behavioral functioning and language abilities of children with ASD. However, among the subdomains, the results were inconsistent. According to the meta-analyses, there were considerable improvements in the social cognition, communication, irritability, and hyperactivity domains, but not in the domains of social awareness, mannerisms, motivation, lethargy, stereotypy, or inappropriate speech. Moreover, there was a lack of sufficient comparative data to conclude that EAAT programs lead to substantial improvements in motor and sensory functioning. In addition, among the included studies, we noted the indicator of whether EAAT programs decreased parental stress and improved family functioning, and although there were four articles in which the researchers considered this aspect, we were unable to draw any conclusions because of the insufficient data and conflicting descriptive evidence. However, we need to consider the improvement in parental mental health as a factor in the effectiveness of this complementary intervention. We hope that in future studies, researchers will focus on family functioning and conduct more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with blinded assessments using different scales and measures.

Background: Recent trials have highlighted the potential of oral antiviral VV116 in the treatment of patients with mild COVID-19. However, no comprehensive studies have assessed the safety and efficacy of VV116. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to assess the safety and efficacy of VV116. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar websites, with a cutoff date of March 23, to identify pertinent studies. Results: The results from the 3 included studies indicated that no serious adverse events were reported in the VV116 experimental groups, which exhibited a 2.57-day faster time to viral shedding than the control group and demonstrated non-inferiority to the nirmatrelvir-ritonavir control group in alleviating major symptoms. Discussion: Collectively, available studies suggest a reliable safety and efficacy profile for VV116. However, the limited number of trials was insufficient for meta-analysis, and the included population consisted of younger individuals with mild and moderate symptoms, not encompassing the elderly who are severely affected by COVID-19. We hope that more studies will be conducted in the future to ensure that VV116 has a more reliable safety and efficacy profile in the clinical setting, especially in severe or critical patients.

Age-related Differences in Processing Speed in Preschool Children