The current review evaluated 11 peer-reviewed or dissertation studies whose primary independent variable was a treatment package designed to teach typically developing children strategies to improve the academic or social functioning of their siblings with autism. The author operationalized the quality indicators created by Horner et al. (2005), which outlined 21 items that define rigorous single-subject research and applied them to each study. Each of the 11 studies’ outcomes was then evaluated based on a definition by Ferguson et al. (2019) in order to standardize how the results of the studies were described. Furthermore, every study was analyzed based on participant demographics (e.g., age, sex and diagnosis), research design, independent variables, components of the training program, dependent variables, generalization, and maintenance. The results indicate that the average percent rigor of the sibling-mediated intervention literature is 77%. The most common item excluded in, both, peer-reviewed and dissertation articles was procedural fidelity. The most common components included in the sibling training treatment packages were verbal instruction and role-play. Also, most studies used a multiple-baseline design and achieved either positive or mixed results. No studies obtained negative results, which may indicate that children are able to be trained as interventionists for their siblings with autism or that studies with negative results are not published or accepted as dissertations. Implications for future research are discussed. / Applied Behavioral Analysis

Peer mediated interventions have been effective in teaching academic and social skills to students with disabilities. The present study assesses the effectiveness of students with autism spectrum disorder serving as the tutor and tutee. Four peer mediators and four students with autism spectrum disorder used technology and the simultaneous prompting procedure to teach acquisition of social studies vocabulary. Results indicate that both students with and without autism spectrum disorder effectively delivered instruction using technology and all students learned a portion of the vocabulary taught by a same-aged peer.

Background: Students with ASD are facing challenges in inclusive school settings. Despite some research have explore some components of peer-mediated intervention, there is gap between the practical implementation and current knowledge. Research aim: The research aims to synthesize the knowledge about school-based peer-mediated intervention for children with ASD. Method: The systematic review was applied in this research. Intervention component analysis to identify the component of PMI. Reichow’s evaluation instrument were used to assess the quality of included studies.  Conclusion: The content of peer-mediated intervention includes the PMI types, intervention intent and the combination of phases. Intervention outcome includes the measure methods and the result of outcome. The shared phases of conducting peer-mediated interventions are students recruitment, peer training and students meeting. The components of peer training are training package, deliver method and intensity. The components of students meeting are setting, context and intensity. Three of studies were assessed as strong quality of research, ten studies were assessed as adequate quality of research.

No description available.

One of the core features of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), social communication impairment, presents in a variety of ways, including reduced functional language use and social initiations, which often warrant intensive intervention services. Additionally, parents of children with ASD demonstrate increased levels of parenting stress when compared to parents of typically developing children and children with developmental delays (Hayes and Watson, 2013). Elevated parenting stress has been shown to diminish positive treatment outcomes (Osborne et al., 2008), which lends support to develop methodologies to concomitantly target child and parent behaviors. The current randomized control trial (RCT) uses a dual-pronged approach to directly target both child communication deficits and parenting stress within a group format. This RCT combined an empirically supported behavioral therapy, Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT), with components from Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Mindful Parenting for reducing parenting stress. Fifteen pairs of caregivers and their minimally or pre-verbal child with diagnosed or suspected ASD were randomly assigned to one of the following supplemental conditions: mindfulness-enhanced PRT (mPRT; n = 8) or psychoeducation-enhanced PRT (pPRT; n = 7) as an active control condition. Of these, five pairs completed each condition. The current study assessed feasibility and acceptability in addition to demonstrating proof of concept in regard to additive effects of mPRT compared to pPRT. Results provided mixed support for feasibility and efficacy of a multi-component group treatment approach. There was a low retention rate and the small sample sizes significantly decreased power. However, parents endorsed high satisfaction, demonstrated fidelity of PRT implementation, and children significantly increased their expressive language abilities. In regard to group-level analyses for primary and exploratory aims, the mPRT group showed significant decreases in parenting stress and increases in mindfulness. At the individual level, some parents in both groups showed positive changes in mindfulness, positive feelings toward child, and child problem behavior. Future directions should continue to explore the additive effects of mindfulness-based intervention on group-based parent-mediated treatments using larger sample sizes. / Doctor of Philosophy / Social communication difficulties are one of the core components of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and many treatments are specifically designed to target these challenges. Additionally, parents of children with ASD report higher levels of parenting stress when compared to parents of typically developing children and children with developmental delays (Hayes & Watson, 2013). High parenting stress has been shown to decrease the likelihood of positive treatment outcomes (Osborne et al., 2008). As a result, creating a treatment that targets both parent and child difficulties simultaneously may lead to important outcomes for the family unit. The current study combined treatments that have been shown to increase child language and decrease parenting stress. Fifteen pairs of caregivers and their child with language delays and ASD were randomly assigned (i.e., similar to a flip of a coin) to receive Pivotal Response Treatment (PRT) and one of the following: mindfulness (mPRT; n = 8) or psychoeducation (pPRT; n = 7). Ten total families completed the treatment (5 per group). The current study measured the practicality and usefulness of adding either mindfulness or psychoeducation to PRT. Results provided mixed support for the practicality of a group treatment approach that combined two treatments. Approximately two-thirds of the families who started treatment finished treatment. The parents who completed treatment showed high satisfaction ratings and demonstrated that they could accurately perform the treatment techniques taught in group sessions. In addition, children increased their language abilities. Parents in the mindfulness group showed significant decreases in parenting stress and increases in mindfulness. At the individual level, some parents in both groups showed positive changes in mindfulness, positive feelings toward child, and child problem behavior. Future directions include measuring these changes with a larger number of families.

Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by social and communication deficits, as well as restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped behaviors, interests, and activities (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Although important relationships have been shown and described among the issues of challenging behavior, parent stress, and parenting sense of competence for families of children with ASD, there is a shortage of intervention programs appropriately suited for families which target these issues. Some programs have been developed and tested, but none is directly applicable for the target population. This is notable because of the connections drawn in the literature between families of children with ASD and the issues of challenging child behavior, parent stress, and parent sense of competence. Additionally, access to ASD-trained clinicians and research supported delivery options for families in rural areas is severely limited. COMPASS for Hope (C-HOPE) is an 8-week parent intervention program that was developed with the option of telehealth or face-to-face delivery. This study examined an asynchronous group discussion board adaptation of C-HOPE, which was developed to further support underserved families. Three main hypotheses were made: (1) Parents will report less challenging child behaviors post-intervention; (2) Parents will report lower levels of stress post-intervention; and (3) Parents will report higher sense of competency post-intervention. With a small sample size of 10, paired-samples t-tests were conducted and effect sizes were calculated to compare the pre- and post-intervention scores for challenging child behavior, parent stress, and parenting sense of competence. There was a statistically significant difference in the scores for challenging child behavior pre-intervention (M = 146.40, SD = 35.36) and post-intervention (M = 123.10, SD = 28.35); t(9) = 3.05, p = 0.01. The effect size for this analysis (d = 0.73) was found to fall between Cohen’s (1988) convention for a medium (d = 0.50) to large (d = 0.80) effect. There was also a statistically significant difference in the scores for parent stress pre-intervention (M = 122.60, SD = 25.73) and post-intervention (M = 109.50, SD = 26.47); t(9) = 2.51, p = 0.03. There was a medium effect size for this analysis (d = 0.50). There was not a significant difference in the scores for parenting sense of competence pre-intervention (M = 55.20, SD = 17.59) and post-intervention (M = 50.50, SD = 17.51); t(9) = 1.11, p = 0.30. Additionally, treatment adherence and social validity for the intervention were acceptable. The implications of these findings are discussed.

No description available.

L’automédiatisation, comme une autre forme de communication sociale, est une démarche de médiatisation de groupes de parole par l’image vidéo. Dans un contexte de distorsion du lien social (chômage, solitude, repli sur soi…), il s’agit de s’interroger sur la place et le rôle de la caméra dans sa capacité à transformer les sujets individuels et collectifs lorsqu’ils portent un regard sur eux-mêmes et sur la société. Il s’agit aussi de questionner le rapport entre la caméra et le groupe de parole par l’intervention du tiers –médiatiseur (le filmeur). Pour appréhender la façon dont l’outil vidéo façonne, influence la parole des participants d’un groupe, quatre axes de travail se détachent :1) comprendre les relations entre les groupes de parole, la caméra et le filmeur pour participer à un mouvement d’émergence du sujet et à une transformation de la société 2) réfléchir aux capacités de transformation d’un outil, comme la caméra, sur les acteurs, pour sortir du manque de considération ou de l’exclusion3) créer et renforcer les liens entre les participants au sein des groupes et entre les groupes, grâce à l’influence de l’outil vidéo4) partir de l’interdisciplinarité pour appréhender les questions de difficultés de dialogue.A travers ces quatre axes de recherche, le travail de terrain a consisté à comprendre la mise en place d’une médiatisation par des acteurs, confrontés au « diktat » de l’image, car ces mêmes acteurs perçoivent la caméra d'abord comme une occasion de paraître à « l’écran », plus qu’un moyen de débattre des préoccupations quotidiennes ou d’investigation sociologique. C'est pourquoi il faut s'appuyer sur la dynamique du groupe et de ses acteurs pour comprendre en quoi la caméra suscite une communication sociale, et permet aux groupes de parole de réfléchir et de se réfléchir. Mais aussi la question principale : en quoi l’utilisation de la caméra dans le groupe fait-elle évoluer la capacité des participants à "s’auto-analyser" pour aller vers une construction commune, une transformation sociale ? / The automediatisation, as another form of social communication, is an approach of “médiatisation” of speech groups through video image. In a context of distortion of social cohesion (unemployment, loneliness, withdrawal…), we should tackle the question of the place and of the role of video camera in its ability to transform individual and collective subjects when they look at themselves and at society. I also question the relationship between video camera and the speech group through the intervention of a mediating third party (the person who films). In order to apprehend the way the video skill shapes, influences the speech of the participants to a group, four research axis will be followed:- Understanding the relationships between speech groups, the video camera and the person who films, in order to participate to a movement of emergence of the subject and to a transformation of society- Thinking about the capacities of transformation of a skill, like the video camera, on the actors, in order to go out of the miss of consideration or of exclusion.- Creating and enforcing links between participants within groups and between groups, thanks to the influence of the video skill.- Using interdisciplinarity to tackle the subject of difficulties in dialog. Through these four research axis, field work consisted in understanding the implementation of a “médiatisation” by the actors, who were confronted to the “diktat” of image, as these very actors first perceived video camera as an occasion to appear “on screen”, more than a way to discuss their daily concerns or as a skill for sociological investigation. That is why I had to rely on the dynamics of the group and of its actors, so as to understand how video camera creates a social communication, and allows speech groups to think, and to think about themselves. But also the main question: how does the use of video camera in the group allow the development of participant’s ability to analyze themselves, and go towards a common construction, a social transformation?

L’augmentation du nombre d’enfants avec un trouble du spectre de l’autisme (TSA) accroît les demandes sur le réseau de la santé et des services sociaux du Québec. Les programmes d’accompagnement parental semblent une alternative intéressante pour répondre aux besoins des familles ayant un jeune enfant avec un diagnostic ou une suspicion de TSA. Par contre, peu de chercheurs se sont intéressés à l’expérience des parents qui sont pourtant les acteurs-clés de ce type d’intervention. Cette étude mixte séquentielle explicative vise à évaluer un programme d’accompagnement parental de 12 semaines pour des enfants de 12 à 30 mois avec une suspicion de TSA en considérant autant les effets sur l’enfant que son parent. Méthodologie : Pour le volet quantitatif (essai clinique randomisé croisé), les 19 dyades parent-enfant ont été randomisées dans le groupe Intervention (immédiatement) ou le groupe Liste d’attente qui devait attendre trois mois avant de recevoir l’intervention. Les données collectées via des questionnaires et par observation directe réalisés trois à quatre fois en fonction du groupe de randomisation ont été analysées à l’aide de statistiques descriptives, de comparaisons inter- et intra-groupe. Pour le volet qualitatif (exploratoire), une analyse thématique a été complétée pour le contenu des entrevues semi-dirigées effectuées auprès d’un sous-échantillon de 6 parents. Résultats : Globalement, le programme a été fortement apprécié (score médian = 3,625/4). Plus spécifiquement, le programme met en évidence un effet positif significatif de l’intervention sur l’engagement dyadique (p = 0,012; taille d’effet = 0,51). De plus, les habiletés cognitives (p = 0,010; taille d’effet = 0,57) et motrices (p = 0,071; taille d’effet = 0,38) des enfants se normalisent suite à la participation au programme. La quasi-absence d’effet sur le bien-être parental pourrait être améliorée en offrant davantage de soutien directement aux parents pendant les interventions plutôt que de se concentrer uniquement sur le développement des habiletés nécessaires à la stimulation de leur enfant. Conclusion : L’intervention d’accompagnement parental a eu des effets bénéfiques prometteurs sur la variable proximale (interactions parent-enfant) et, dans une moindre mesure, sur les variables distales (développement de l’enfant, bien-être parental et validité sociale). L’intervention gagnerait toutefois à être bonifiée afin de mieux répondre aux besoins de soutien des parents. / Abstract: The increase in the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) puts pressure on the healthcare system. Parent-mediated interventions are an interesting alternative to answer the needs of families having a toddler with a diagnosis or a suspicion of ASD. However, few researchers have looked at parents’ experience during parent-mediated interventions even though parents are the main actors of these interventions. This sequential explanatory mixed study aims to evaluate a 12-week parent-mediated intervention for young children with a suspicion of ASD aged between 12 and 30 months by considering both parents’ and children’s outcomes. Methods: For the quantitative part (crossover randomized controlled trial), the 19 parent-child dyads were randomized either in the Intervention group or the Waitlist group (participants in this group had to wait three months before getting access to the intervention). Data were collected through questionnaires and direct observation three to four times depending on the group allocation. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics as well as between and within group comparisons. For the qualitative part (exploratory), semi-directed interviews conducted with a subsample of six participants were analyzed thematically. Results: The program was globally highly appreciated (median score = 3.625/4). Specifically, there was a significant positive effect of the intervention on parent-child dyadic engagement (p = .012; effect size = .51). Furthermore, there was a normalization of children’s cognitive (p = .010; effect size = .57) and motor abilities (p = .071; effect size = .38) after the 12-week program. The near absence of effect on parental well-being could be fixed by targeting specifically parental support rather than focusing on their skills development. Conclusion: The parent-mediated intervention brings promising benefits on the proximal outcome (parent-child interactions) and, to a lesser extent, on distal outcomes (children development, parental well-being and social validity). Still, the intervention should be adapted to better answer parental needs.

No description available.