Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37425987›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on behavior science2023

Response to ABAI Task Force on the Use of Contingent Electric Skin Shock.

Jennifer R Zarcone, Ivan Brown, Peter E Langdon, Michael Mullane, Mindy Scheithauer

Abstract readEditorial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on behavior science, 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

5 authors.

Jennifer R ZarconeMay Institute, 41 Pacella Park Drive, Randolph, MA 02368 USA.
Ivan BrownBrock University, St. Catharine's, Ontario Canada.
Peter E LangdonUniversity of Warwick and Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership NHS Trust, Coventry, England.
Michael MullaneCambridge Health Alliance and Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, MA USA.
Mindy ScheithauerChildren's Hospital of Atlanta and Emory University, Atlanta, GA USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, the authors provide their response to the Association for Behavior Analysis International (2022) position statement on the use of contingent electric skin shock (CESS). In this response, we address concerns raised by the task force regarding limitations of the Zarcone et al. (2020) review article in which both methodological and ethical concerns were raised about the quality of research in the use of CESS with people with disabilities in the treatment of challenging behavior. We note that with the exception of the Judge Rotenberg Center in Massachusetts, no state or country currently supports the use of CESS as it is not recognized as the standard of care in any other program, school, or facility.

Indexed as

Challenging behaviorContingent electric skin shockPunishment

Identifiers

PMID37425987
PMCPMC10323054

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.