Establishing evidence-and research-based practices relies upon research synthesis of individual studies in reviews and meta analyses. Further summarizing scientific evidence about a specific topic by synthesizing reviews is an area of need to determine practices that have a strong evidence base and to identify areas of methodological weakness and gaps in the literature. A mega-review of literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on interventions using aided augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) interventions for children with intellectual and developmental disabilities from 2000 to mid-2020 was conducted. Participant and interventionist demographics, interventions, settings, outcomes, and recommendations of each review were reported and summarized. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews Revised (AMSTAR 2; Shea et al., 2017) was used to examine the methodological rigor of 84 included reviews. Over the past 20 years, published reviews have increased slightly in methodological rigor but demonstrate a number of methodological weaknesses that detract from the strength of evidence for AAC interventions with this population. Suggestions for improving the methodological rigor of literature reviews and areas for future research specific to AAC interventions are discussed.
Individuals with disabilities who are English learners (ELs) and communicate using speech generating devices (SGDs) may demonstrate a preference for instructional language and language output of their SGDs. The influence of interventionist language on the preference of SGD language output and frequency of mands was examined using an alternating-treatments design with an embedded concurrent-chain arrangement with a 10-year-old with Down syndrome whose heritage language was Spanish. Language preference assessment for ELs is recommended because heritage language may be preferred for children with disabilities who use SGDs.
Individuals with disabilities and/or mental health concerns were historically removed from society and placed in institutions and asylums. Advocacy groups, drawing on civil rights movements, protested and lobbied for deinstitutionalization and increased inclusion of disabled individuals in schools and communities (Chapman et al.,
2014
). Although disabled individuals have more rights and access than ever before, they are still segregated in schools, encounter the judicial system more often, and are murdered by police (Reingle Gonzalez et al. in
Journal of Disability Policy Studies 27
:106-115,
2016
). We examine the history and ongoing incarceration of individuals with differences in the United States by analyzing contextual variables, as well as systemic inequities, including the school-to-prison pipeline, access to services, and prison infrastructure. We offer resources and actionable ways for behavior analysts to begin antiracist and anti-disableist work, apply principles of behavior analysis to address personal and systemic racism, and engage in advocacy toward a more just and equitable future for all.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.