Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37006417›Full record

ArticleBehavior analysis in practice2023

Impact of a Training Package to Improve the Effectiveness of Descriptive Assessment Data.

Lisa Tereshko, Mary Jane Weiss, Jill Harper, Robert K Ross

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavior analysis in practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Lisa TereshkoEndicott College, Beverly, MA USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3932-5131
Mary Jane WeissEndicott College, Beverly, MA USA.
Jill HarperEndicott College, Beverly, MA USA.
Robert K RossBeacon ABA Services, Leominster, MA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying the maintaining contingencies of problem behavior can lead to effective treatment that reduces the occurrence of problem behavior and increases the potential for the occurrence of alternative behaviors. Many studies use descriptive assessments, but results vary in effectiveness and validity. Comparative research further supports the superior utility of analog functional analyses over descriptive assessments, but clinicians continue to report the consistent use of descriptive assessments in practice. Direct training on the recording of descriptive assessments as well as the process for interpreting the results are limited. The absence of research-based guidance leaves clinicians to interpret the results as they see fit rather than following best practice guidelines for this critical activity. This study examined the potential impact of direct training on several components of descriptive assessment: the recording of narrative antecedent-behavior-consequence data, interpretation of the data, and the selection of a function-based treatment. Implications for training and practice are reviewed.

Indexed as

ABC datadescriptive assessmentfunctional analysisstaff training

Identifiers

PMID37006417
PMCPMC10050291

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.