Michelle Dawson posts

Post published on Bluesky on 19 Apr 2025 11:34

Bluesky DOI work crossref Extract quoted in the post Question asked by Dawson in the post External link integrated into the post

In recent (2002-22) ABA single case studies targeting "problem behavior" in autistic & IDD adults, "it appears large effect sizes may be generally associated with multi-protocol treatments that featured a punishment element"? journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/... dubious unregistered review, free

View on Bluesky

Structured cited links

1 cited resource

DOI work Fetched Post crossref

Nazurah Khokhar, Alison D. Cox, Asude Ayvaci, Thurka Thillainathan, Sonia Stellato (2026). Research Patterns in the Treatment of Adults With Problem Behavior and Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: A Quantitative Systematic Review. Behavior Modification, 50(1), 3-31. SAGE Publications.

Publication date
12 Apr 2025
Identifier
10.1177/01454455251332545
Authors
Nazurah Khokhar, Alison D. Cox, Asude Ayvaci, Thurka Thillainathan, Sonia Stellato
Source
Behavior Modification
Details
50(1), 3-31
Reference type
article
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Metadata source
crossref

Abstract

Research featuring adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities who engage in problem behavior has outlined various treatment approaches. The current quantitative systematic literature review identified and coded 76 peer-reviewed and gray literature articles published between January 2002 and September 2022. Following article identification and coding, we calculated effect size estimates (i.e., Tau Baseline Corrected) and assessed the methodological rigor of included articles. Through this work, we uncovered 42 unique multi-protocol treatments (i.e., treatments incorporating multiple therapeutic elements). Multi-protocol treatments were associated with larger effect sizes (more effective) compared to single-protocol treatments. The average methodological rigor score associated with peer-reviewed works was 1.6 (out of 4), while gray literature works scored 1.2. We offer commentary in response to these outcomes, alongside recommendations for future research to address the many avenues of inquiry that appear to remain largely neglected (e.g., component analysis to evaluate individual treatment elements and their efficacy).

Study authors in this cited reference