Advertisement

Trajectories of Evidence Based Treatment for School Children with Autism: What’s the Right Level for the Implementation?

  • Victor LushinEmail author
  • David Mandell
  • Rinad Beidas
  • Steven Marcus
  • Heather Nuske
  • Victor Kaploun
  • Max Seidman
  • Daphney Gaston
  • Jill Locke
Original Paper

Abstract

Evidence-based practices (EBP) for children with autism are under-used in special-education schools. No research compared child-level versus teacher-level influences on EBP use, which could guide implementation strategies. We derived longitudinal profiles of EBP receipt by children (N = 234) in 69 autism-support classrooms, over an academic year. We compared overall impacts of child-level and teacher-level factors on profile membership. Most children received little EBP throughout the year; however substantial subgroups received increasing, and decreasing, doses of EBP. Child-level and teacher-level factors contributed about equally to profile membership. Children’s autism symptoms and verbal ability, teachers’ EBP skills, training/experience, classroom support, class size, and implementation leadership climate predicted profile membership. Early identification of treatment profiles could facilitate targeted implementation strategies increasing EBP use.

Keywords

Autism Evidence based practices Special education 

Notes

Funding

The project providing data for this study was funded by NIMH (Grant Number R01 MH106175 04). The PI is author, David Mandell, ScD. Victor Lushin, Ph.D., worked on this manuscript while supported by NIH T32 Postdoctoral Fellowship, T32-MH109433-01A1.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Aarons, G. A., Ehrhart, M. G., & Farahnak, L. R. (2014). The implementation leadership scale (ILS): Development of a brief measure of unit level implementation leadership. Implementation Science,9(1), 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aarons, G. A., Hurlburt, M., & Horwitz, S. M. (2011). Advancing a conceptual model of evidence-based practice implementation in public service sectors. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research,38(1), 4–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson, D. K., Lord, C., Risi, S., DiLavore, P. S., Shulman, C., Thurm, A., …, Pickles, A. (2007). Patterns of growth in verbal abilities among children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75(4), 594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asparouhov, T., & Muthén, B. (2014). Auxiliary variables in mixture modeling: Three-step approaches using M plus. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,21(3), 329–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beran, T. N. (2007). Elliott, CD (2007). Differential ability scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment. Canadian Journal of School Psychology,22(1), 128–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Castro, S. L. (2002). Data analytic methods for the analysis of multilevel questions: A comparison of intraclass correlation coefficients, r wg(j), hierarchical linear modeling, within-and between-analysis, and random group resampling. The Leadership Quarterly,13(1), 69–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cohen, I. L., & Sudhalter, V. (2005). PDD behavior inventory (PDDBI). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  8. Cook, B. G., & Odom, S. L. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children,79(2), 135–144.Google Scholar
  9. Ehrhart, M. G., Aarons, G. A., & Farahnak, L. R. (2014). Assessing the organizational context for EBP implementation: The development and validity testing of the implementation climate scale (ICS). Implementation Science,9(1), 157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elliott, S. N. (1990). The nature and structure of the DAS: Questioning the test’s organizing model and use. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,8(3), 406–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fishman, J., Beidas, R., Reisinger, E., & Mandell, D. S. (2018). The utility of measuring intentions to use best practices: A longitudinal study among teachers supporting students with autism. Journal of School Health,88(5), 388–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fishman, J., Lushin, V., Pellecchia, M., & Mandell, D. S. (Under review). Intentions to implement evidence based practices in autism services: Measurement issues and predictive validity.Google Scholar
  14. Guilamo-Ramos, V., Jaccard, J., Lushin, V., Martinez, R., Gonzalez, B., & McCarthy, K. (2011). HIV risk behavior among youth in the Dominican Republic: The role of alcohol and other drugs. Journal of the International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care,10(6), 388–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 65–70.Google Scholar
  16. Houtveen, J. H., & Oei, N. Y. (2007). Recall bias in reporting medically unexplained symptoms comes from semantic memory. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,62(3), 277–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Howlin, P., Magiati, I., & Charman, T. (2009). Systematic review of early intensive behavioral interventions for children with autism. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities,114(1), 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jaccard, J. (2001). Interaction effects in logistic regression (Vol. 135). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jaccard, J., & Levitz, N. (2015). Parent-based interventions to reduce adolescent problem behaviors: New directions for self-regulation approaches. in Self-regulation in adolescence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Jaccard, J., & Wan, C. K. (1995). A paradigm for studying the accuracy of self-reports of risk behavior relevant to AIDS: Empirical perspectives on stability, recall bias, and transitory influences. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,25(20), 1831–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Judge, T. A., & Kammeyer-Mueller, J. D. (2012). General and specific measures in organizational behavior research: Considerations, examples, and recommendations for researchers. Journal of Organizational Behavior,33(2), 161–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2006). Pivotal response treatments for autism: Communication, social, & academic development. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Lai, K. (2018). Estimating standardized SEM parameters given nonnormal data and incorrect model: Methods and comparison. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,25(4), 600–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Locke, J., Wolk, C. B., Harker, C., Olsen, A., Shingledecker, T., Barg, F., et al. (2017). Pebbles, rocks, and boulders: The implementation of a school-based social engagement intervention for children with autism. Autism,21(8), 985–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marshall, S., McGoey, K. E., & Moschos, S. (2011). Test review: CD Elliott differential ability scales. San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment, 2007. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment,29(1), 89–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nonaka, I., & Von Krogh, G. (2009). Perspective—Tacit knowledge and knowledge conversion: Controversy and advancement in organizational knowledge creation theory. Organization Science,20(3), 635–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nuske, H. J., Pellecchia, M., Lushin, V., Rump, K., Seidman, M., Ouellette, R. R., …, Reisinger, E. M. (2019). Do student characteristics affect teachers’ decisions to use 1: 1 instruction? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1–9.Google Scholar
  28. Nylund, K., Bellmore, A., Nishina, A., & Graham, S. (2007). Subtypes, severity, and structural stability of peer victimization: What does latent class analysis say? Child Development,78(6), 1706–1722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pellecchia, M., Beidas, R. S., Marcus, S. C., Fishman, J., Kimberly, J. R., Cannuscio, C. C., …, Mandell, D. S. (2016). Study protocol: implementation of a computer-assisted intervention for autism in schools: A hybrid type II cluster randomized effectiveness-implementation trial. Implementation Science, 11(1), 154.Google Scholar
  30. Pellecchia, M., Connell, J. E., Beidas, R. S., Xie, M., Marcus, S. C., & Mandell, D. S. (2015). Dismantling the active ingredients of an intervention for children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,45(9), 2917–2927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Polanyi, M. (1966). The logic of tacit inference. Philosophy,41(155), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Polanyi, M. (2009). The tacit dimension. Chicago: University of Chicago press.Google Scholar
  33. Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2011). Alternative methods for assessing mediation in multilevel data: The advantages of multilevel SEM. Structural Equation Modeling,18(2), 161–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schulenberg, J., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., Wadsworth, K. N., & Johnston, L. D. (1996). Getting drunk and growing up: trajectories of frequent binge drinking during the transition to young adulthood. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,57(3), 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smith, T. (2001). Discrete trial training in the treatment of autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities,16(2), 86–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stahmer, A. C., Rieth, S., Lee, E., Reisinger, E. M., Connell, J. E., & Mandell, D. S. (2015). Training teachers to use evidence-based practices for autism: Examining procedural implementation fidelity. Psychology in the Schools,52(2), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stichter, J. P., Riley-Tillman, T. C., & Jimerson, S. R. (2016). Assessing, understanding, and supporting students with autism at school: Contemporary science, practice, and policy. School Psychology Quarterly,31(4), 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Thurm, A., Lord, C., Lee, L. C., & Newschaffer, C. (2007). Predictors of language acquisition in preschool children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders,37(9), 1721–1734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Long Island UniversityBrooklynUSA
  2. 2.University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.National Research University Higher School of EconomicsSt. PetersburgRussia
  4. 4.University of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  5. 5.Long Island University Brooklyn, School of Health ProfessionsBrooklynUSA

Personalised recommendations