Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31432310›Full record

ArticleJournal of autism and developmental disorders2019

Social Validity and Teachers' Use of Evidence-Based Practices for Autism.

Jordan McNeill

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jordan McNeillThe University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. jmcneill@unc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2433-6022

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The autism intervention literature focuses heavily on the concept of evidence-based practice, with less consideration of the acceptability, feasibility, and contextual alignment of interventions in practice. A survey of 130 special educators was conducted to quantify this "social validity" of evidence-based practices and analyze its relationship with knowledge level and frequency of use. Results indicate that knowledge, use, and social validity are tightly-connected and rank the highest for modeling, reinforcement, prompting, and visual supports. Regression analysis suggests that greater knowledge, higher perceived social validity, and a caseload including more students with autism predicts more frequent use of a practice. The results support the vital role that social validity plays in teachers' implementation, with implications for both research and practice.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSocial PerceptionAdultAutistic DisorderEducation, SpecialEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHumansMaleSchool TeachersAutismEvidence-based practiceInterventionSocial validitySpecial education

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.