The Evidence Base for Interventions for Individuals With ASD: A Call to Improve Practice Conceptualization and Synthesis

Ledford, Jennifer R.; Lambert, Joseph M.; Barton, Erin E.; Ayres, Kevin M.

doi:10.1177/10883576211023349

Cited by 15 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although imperfect (cf. Ledford et al, 2021), the processes by which evidence from single‐case designs are accumulated and understood are fairly well accepted and large‐scale summative efforts have already made a substantial impact on the visibility of those techniques most likely to influence client performance (e.g., Horner et al, 2005; Steinbrenner et al, 2020). However, the ways in which effective practitioners come to select, draft, adjust, and match techniques to circumstance in the service of valued outcomes is not well understood (Bruhn et al, 2020) and clinical judgment has been a white whale which continues to elude operationalization efforts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Lambert¹,

Copeland²,

Paranczak³

et al. 2022

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individualization and iterative design are essential components of the assessment and treatment of challenging behavior. Currently, there are few validated frameworks for engaging in iterative processes. Due to the nature of single-case design, empirically rigorous evaluations of decision-tree processes are particularly prohibitive. Notwithstanding, evaluations are needed. In this paper we first describe a function-informed and mechanisms-based (FIMB) framework for selecting treatment components employed by a university-based practicum experience designed to expose pre-service practitioners to a valid treatment process for challenging behavior. Then, we share a completed retrospective consecutive case series across a 6-year period in which we conducted a technique analysis to identify which procedures were most commonly selected in the practicum, and the impact of those choices on client outcomes. The results suggest that the model can be highly effective for some, but not all, cases. Implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Lambert¹,

Copeland²,

Paranczak³

et al. 2022

J of App Behav Analysis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unfortunately, as with other interventions identified as evidence-based (cf. Ledford et al, 2021), there are also a multitude of instances in which these procedures do not lead to improvements in stereotypy.…”

Section: Treating Stereotypymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They identified these procedures as being evidence based for improving a wide variety of outcomes: academic behaviors, adaptive behavior, challenging behaviors, communication, motor skills, play skills, school readiness (e.g., engagement), and social behaviors. However, the procedures and resulting findings from this large-scale review have been identified as potentially problematic (Leaf, 2021;Ledford et al, 2021). Importantly, because this review only included studies with positive outcomes, it does not provide information about negative or equivocal findings.…”

Section: Previous Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systematic review of interruption and redirection procedures for autistic individuals

Ledford

Trump

Chazin

et al. 2022

Behavioral Interventions

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interruption and redirection (IR) procedures involve systematically disrupting an undesirable behavior and prompting an individual to engage in an alternative behavior (e.g., Ahearn et al., 2007). These procedures have been frequently assessed for reducing stereotypy for autistic individuals. The purposes of this review were to determine (a) for whom and under what conditions physical and verbal IR procedures are assessed; (b) what outcomes are measured; (c) whether results vary by intervention characteristics, dependent variable types, design quality, and publication status; and (d) the extent to which generalization and maintenance outcomes are measured and show positive effects. IR interventions were moderately successful for reducing stereotypy but were less effective for improving appropriate vocalizations and functional engagement. Generalization and maintenance outcomes, when measured, were poor. Results indicate the need for alternative or augmentative procedures that focus on engagement in meaningful interactions and activities.

show abstract

“…Addressing calls for more specific investigations into subtypes of EBPs, we took a novel approach to autism EBP exploration by attending to both multicomponent practices and strategies ( 51 ). To develop a set of multicomponent practices and strategies that are used to support meaningful inclusion and retention of autistic children in general education settings, we used explicit criteria for exclusion of practices from the NPDC review—practices could not: (1) be assessments (e.g., functional behavior assessment); (2) implemented only outside of schools (e.g., parent-implemented); or (3) require certification (e.g., Pivotal Response Training, Sensory Integration Therapy).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Supporting the inclusion and retention of autistic students: Exploring teachers' and paraeducators' use of evidence-based practices in public elementary schools

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionEducators in public schools are required to serve students in their least restrictive environment. While many evidence-based practices (EBPs), defined as practices and strategies shown by research to have meaningful effectson outcomes for autistic students are documented in the literature, less is known about EBP use among educators in public schools.MethodsEighty-six general and special education teachers and para educators completed a survey about familiarity, training, and EBP use for included autistic children.ResultsAcross roles, educators reported familiarity (98.8%), use (97.7%), and training (83.7%) in reinforcement. They reported the least familiarity with behavioral momentum (29.1%), training in both video modeling and peer-mediated instruction and intervention (18.6%), and use of video modeling (14.0%). Follow-up interviews (n = 80) highlighted mixed understanding of EBP definitions and use.DiscussionImplications for inclusive education are discussed including autism-specific EBP training within pre-service teacher preparation programs.

show abstract

The Evidence Base for Interventions for Individuals With ASD: A Call to Improve Practice Conceptualization and Synthesis

Cited by 15 publications

References 60 publications

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Description and evaluation of a function‐informed and mechanisms‐based framework for treating challenging behavior

Systematic review of interruption and redirection procedures for autistic individuals

Supporting the inclusion and retention of autistic students: Exploring teachers' and paraeducators' use of evidence-based practices in public elementary schools

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About