ARCHIVES

Background: Social Storiesare widely used to provide autistic children and adolescents with individualized, structured information about social situations, expected behaviors, routines, and transitions. Previous systematic reviews have generally reported beneficial effects on selected social and behavioral outcomes, but have also identified substantial methodological weaknesses, heterogeneity in intervention delivery, and limited evidence regarding maintenance and generalization. Karkhaneh et al. identified positive findings in most of the controlled trials they reviewed but specifically highlighted unresolved questions concerning maintenance and generalization. Similarly, Qi et al. found evidence of intervention effects across single-case studies but noted discrepancies between visual analysis and nonoverlap-based evidence standards. Objective: This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence concerning the efficacy of Social Storiesfor autistic children and adolescents aged 2–18 years, with particular emphasis on adaptive and behavioral outcomes, long-term maintenance, and generalization across people, activities, and settings. A secondary objective was to examine whether intervention format and caregiver involvement may influence maintenance and generalization. Methods: systematic review framework based on PRISMA 2020 was applied. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality single-case experimental designs involving autistic individuals aged 2–18 years who received Social Story interventions and reported follow-up, maintenance, or generalization outcomes. Risk of bias was planned using Cochrane RoB 2 for randomized trials and the Risk of Bias in N-of-1 Trials (RoBiNT) scale for single-case experimental designs. Because RCTs and SCEDs produce fundamentally different effect-size metrics, quantitative synthesis should be conducted separately using Hedges' g for appropriately reported between-group RCT effects and Tau-U for SCEDs. Expected Results: The supplied evidence set identified eight unique primary studies that directly addressed follow-up and/or generalization criteria after accounting for duplicate reports of the ASSSIST-2 trial. These studies included randomized, single-case, and longitudinal designs and involved outcomes spanning social communication, adaptive behavior, self-care, safety skills, disruptive behavior, and adjustment to real-world situations. Evidence for maintenance waspresent from approximately 6 weeks to 6 months, with one study reporting maintenance at multiple post-intervention probes. Quirmbach et al. reported maintenance and generalization of targeted game-play skills, while Hanrahan et al. reported beneficial behavioral outcomes sustained at six-week follow-up. The large ASSSIST-2 RCT found no statistically significant intention-to-treat improvement in teacher-rated social responsiveness at six months, although individual socio-emotional goals were achieved more frequently in the intervention group. SCED evidence demonstrated variable but generally positive maintenance and generalization effects. Anthony and Bobzien reported increases in verbal initiations and on-topic responses across intervention, maintenance, and generalization phases, although Tau-U estimates varied considerably across conditions. Ulaşman and Sivrikaya reported acquisition, generalization, and maintenance of earthquake-safety skills through follow-up probes conducted during the first, third, and fifth weeks after instruction. Conclusion: The available evidence supports Social Stories as a potentially useful intervention for immediate and proximal behavioral and adaptive outcomes in autistic youth. However, long-term maintenance and generalization remain less certain than immediate treatment effects. Evidence does not currently justify the conclusion that maintenance declines specifically at three months, nor does it demonstrate that digital delivery or parental involvement significantly improves maintenance or generalization. Recent evidence instead suggests that digital formats may be promising but that their superiority over paper-based delivery remains unconfirmed. A recent 2026 SCED meta-analysis found a slightly higher Tau-U estimate for digital than paper-based Social Stories, but the difference was not statistically significant. Future research should prioritize adequately powered controlled trials, standardized follow-up intervals, objective measures of generalization, caregiver implementation, and longer-term follow-up.