Oliver C. Mudford

Parent-managed behavioral treatment for preschool children with autism: some characteristics of UK programs.

Early intensive behavioral intervention for autism has attracted controversy since Lovaas (1987) reported that 47% of his experimental group attained normal functioning. We summarize child and program data from 75 children receiving EIBI in the UK. The majority of children (57%) started treatment later than in Lovaas (1987), and 16% did not exceed his minimum IQ criterion. Children experienced fewer hours of treatment (mean of 32 hours vs. 40 hours per week), and their programs received relatively infrequent supervision. 21% of programs received supervision from individuals currently accredited as competent to provide Lovaass treatment. No child started early enough, and received 40 hours per week, and had accredited supervision. Due to these variations from his model, Lovaas (1987) findings are unlikely to be replicated for this sample of children.

Auditory Integration Training for Children with Autism: No Behavioral Benefits Detected.

Auditory integration training and a control treatment were provided for 16 children with autism in a crossover experimental design. Measures, blind to treatment order, included parent and teacher ratings of behavior, direct observational recordings, IQ, language, and social/adaptive tests. Significant differences tended to show that the control condition was superior on parent-rated measures of hyperactivity and on direct observational measures of ear-occlusion. No differences were detected on teacher-rated measures. Childrens IQs and language comprehension did not increase, but adaptive/social behavior scores and expressive language quotients decreased. The majority of parents (56%) were unable to report in retrospect when their child had received auditory integration training. No individual child was identified as benefiting clinically or educationally from the treatment.

Toward the Use of a Standardized Assessment for Young Children with Autism: Current Assessment Practices in the UK

Little is known about the progress of autistic children following specific interventions in England. Nor do we know how frequently standardized assessments are used to monitor progress or to evaluate specific educational interventions. The reports of 75 children with autism, for whom special educational provision had been determined by a local education authority, were reviewed. Parents were interviewed and educational psychologists were contacted for details of any norm-referenced assessments. Of these children, 39 percent had no standardized assessments before education authorities determined their provision, and only 9 percent had follow-up assessments that could be used to evaluate progress. Children with autism in the UK rarely have sufficient assessments to allow an objective evaluation of their progress. There is currently no standardized assessment protocol to prescribe a specific educational intervention, to evaluate the progress of children or to make comparisons between interventions. We recommend the development of such a protocol.

Erratum to “Progress and outcomes for children with autism receiving parent-managed intensive interventions”: [Research in Developmental Disabilities 22 (2001) 425–447]☆☆☆

Parent-managed behavioral interventions for young children with autism are under-researched. We analyzed data from 66 children served by 25 different early intervention consultants. After a mean of 31.6 months of intervention IQ scores had not changed (N = 22). Vineland adaptive behavior scores had increased significantly by 8.9 points (N = 21). No children aged > 72 months attained normal functioning, i.e., IQ > 85 and unassisted mainstream school placement (N = 42). Progress for 60 children across 12 months was found for mental age (5.4 months), adaptive behavior (9.7 months), and language (5.1 months). The interventions did not reproduce results from clinic-based professionally directed programs. The effectiveness of the parent-managed intervention model as it has developed and the adequacy of professional services in that model are discussed.

Behavior states: now you see them, now you don't.

Guess, Roberts, Behrens, and Rues (1998) presented reliability data from recordings of behavior state using a 13-category coding system. Interobserver agreement was reported at 63% to 91% across categories. In an attempt at replication, we found lower levels of reliability (0% to 80%). To determine the reasons for different results, we obtained measurements of behavior states from video-recordings by five of Guess et al.s observers. Again, replication was unsuccessful. Obtained mean percentage agreement on occurrence for individual behavior states and participants ranged across observer pairs from 0% to 58% (kappa range was 0 to .64). Some possible reasons for failures to replicate are discussed.

Researches in Brief

References G U N T E R, B. & M C A L E E R , J. (1997) Children and Television, 2nd edn. London: Routledge. M O R G A N, D. L . & K RU E G E R , R .A . (1993) ‘When To Use Focus Groups and Why’, in D. L . M O R G A N (ed.) Successful Focus Groups. London: Sage. M O R G A N, D. L . & S PA N I S H, M.T. (1984) ‘Focus Groups: A New Tool for Qualitative Research’, Qualitative Sociology 7: 253–70. M O O R E, M. (1997) ‘Interview by RH at Wargrave House School’, 12 February 1997. P OW E L L , S .D. & J O R DA N, R . (1997) Autism and Learning:A Guide to Good Practice. London: David Fulton. T RU T E , B. (1988) The Family Care of Developmentally Disabled Children.Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.. Z I H N I , F. & Z I H N I , F . (1996) ‘The Use of Video Techniques to Develop Language Skills in Autistic Children’, in Autism on the Agenda: Papers from The National Autistic Society Conference, May 1994. London: NAS.