Trajectories of Evidence Based Treatment for School Children with Autism: What’s the Right Level for the Implementation?
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.
KeywordsAutism Evidence based practices Special education
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.
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 was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Cohen, I. L., & Sudhalter, V. (2005). PDD behavior inventory (PDDBI). Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
- Cook, B. G., & Odom, S. L. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children,79(2), 135–144.Google Scholar
- 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
- Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 65–70.Google Scholar
- 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
- Koegel, R. L., & Koegel, L. K. (2006). Pivotal response treatments for autism: Communication, social, & academic development. Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes Publishing.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- Polanyi, M. (2009). The tacit dimension. Chicago: University of Chicago press.Google Scholar