Family Implementation of Positive Behavior Support for a Child With Autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the efficacy, social validity, and durability of a positive behavior support (PBS) approach with the family of a girl with autism and severe problem behavior. The study was conducted across a 10-year period beginning when the child was 5 years old. A multiple baseline across family routines design evaluated the functional relationship between parent implementation of a PBS plan and longitudinal improvements in child behavior and successful participation in routines. Daily indicator behavior data allowed us to assess generalized improvements in child behavior. An inventory of monthly community activities allowed us to assess changes in child quality of life. In addition, social validity and contextual fit were assessed. Results document that the intervention was associated with a 75% reduction in problem behavior, and that the effects were maintained across a 6-month to 7-year follow-up period. Associated outcomes included generalized improvements in child behavior and enhanced community activity patterns. Parents also rated the social validity and contextual fit of the approach highly. Results verify the efficacy and social validity of the approach and offer preliminary descriptive evidence of its durability. Contributions to the literature, implications, and future directions are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".