Learning From Parents: Implementation of a Parent-Mediated Positive Behavior Support Program Targeting Challenging Behavior in Children With Autism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Challenging behaviors (CBs) are frequently observed in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and are known to have negative effects on parents’ stress and well-being, as well as on overall family quality of life. Research has shown that professional support such as the Prevent-Teach-Reinforce (PTR) program has the potential to alleviate those effects. Although several studies have empirically demonstrated this positive behavior support program in managing children’s CB, its implementation by community-based educators among parents of children with ASD has yet to be examined. This study assessed the facilitators and obstacles to this program’s implementation as perceived by 19 parents using interviews and questionnaires. Participants emphasized the significance of setting clear expectations, defining roles, and providing continuous feedback during the implementation process to promote their initiative and enhance their active participation. They recognized the difficulties of implementing the program within a family setting but emphasized the valuable presence of educators in the home, which improved their understanding of family dynamics. Parents valued effective and respectful support from educators, although some encountered disagreements during coaching sessions, highlighting the need for improved educator training with practical coaching and a greater recognition of the family’s perspective.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".