Co-production of the 'EPIC' multidimensional tool-kit to support neurodivergent children and young people at home and school: a feasibility and pilot study.

Background: Interventions focused on cognitive function in neurodivergent children typically focus on single functions, e.g. working memory training. They are often focused on 'deficit' models and lack an emphasis on understanding areas of individual strengths and difficulties as a prerequisite to appropriate support. The multidimensional nature and phenotypic variability of cognitive profiles in these children indicate a need for a multicomponent-tailored intervention programme focused on understanding and supporting an individual child's cognitive functioning.

Aims: The 'EPIC' intervention (Edinburgh Psychoeducation Intervention for Children and Young People) is focused on improving cognition, learning and behaviour in neurodivergent children such as those with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or who are autistic. Building on our previous co-production work, this study aimed to use a participatory methods approach to develop EPIC practices and materials in relation to our key principles which include psychoeducation, multicomponent, individualised approach, strengths and difficulties profiling and pairing of a child's individual strengths and difficulties with internal and external strategies. We also set out to assess the feasibility and acceptability of EPIC, and pilot this novel tool-kit intervention with neurodivergent children and their parents and teachers.

Methods: The intervention practices, materials and strategies of EPIC were co-produced with neurodivergent children, their parents, teachers and clinicians taking a strengths and difficulties approach. Identification of psychoeducation activities and strategy practices (e.g. mind-maps, chunking), testing of feasibility and collection of pilot data were conducted over a bi-weekly 8-week programme. Eleven neurodivergent children aged 7 to 12 completed the 16-session individualised programme. Acceptability and feasibility were ascertained via qualitative reports elicited within child and teacher interviews and child ratings of enjoyment. Pilot evaluation data was collected pre- and post-intervention participation, and across cognitive assessments (CANTAB, BRIEF), educational attainment (WIAT) and parent and teacher questionnaires measuring clinical symptoms and behaviour (Conners, AQ, SDQ, self-perception). Data was compared with a matched neurodivergent treatment-as-usual control group (N = 9).

Results: The co-produced EPIC intervention was both feasible to deliver and acceptable to children, parents and their teachers. Pilot data identified that the 8-week intervention improved cognition (short-term and working memory) and literacy (receptive vocabulary, oral word fluency, listening comprehension). Improvements in the intervention group were also found for parent-reported child behavioural difficulties and aggression, and teacher-reported scholastic competence. Effect sizes generated (Cohen's d) ranged from 0.65 to 2.83. Parents reported continuing to use EPIC strategies when interviewed over a year after participating in the programme.

Conclusion: The current study met our objectives fully. 'EPIC' (Edinburgh Psychoeducation Intervention for Children and Young People) is feasible in home and school contexts and improves a range of aspects of cognition, learning and behaviour in neurodivergent children. Our findings show EPIC is suitable to be assessed within a full-scale trial.