A Systematic Review of Brief Functional Analysis Methodology with Typically Developing Children

Background: Robotic devices have been used to quantify function, identify impairment, and rehabilitate motor function extensively in adults, but less-so in younger populations. The ability to perform motor actions improves as children grow. It is important to quantify this rate of change of the neurotypical population before attempting to identify impairment and target rehabilitation techniques. Objectives: For a population of typically developing children, this systematic review identifies and analyzes tools and techniques used with robotic devices to quantify upper-limb motor function. Since most of the papers also used robotic devices to compare function of neurotypical to pathological populations, a secondary objective was introduced to relate clinical outcome measures to identified robotic tools and techniques. Methods: Five databases were searched between February 2019 and August 2020, and 226 articles were found, 19 of which are included in the review. Results: Robotic devices, tasks, outcome measures, and clinical assessments were not consistent among studies from different settings but were consistent within laboratory groups. Fifteen of the 19 articles evaluated both typically developing and pathological populations. Conclusion: To optimize universally comparable outcomes in future work, it is recommended that a standard set of tasks and measures is used to assess upper-limb motor function. Standardized tasks and measures will facilitate effective rehabilitation.

Download Full-text

Assessment and treatment of anxiety in children and adolescents with ASD: a systematic review

Advances in Autism ◽

10.1108/aia-03-2021-0016 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Celal Perihan ◽

Mack D. Burke ◽

Lisa Bowman-Perrott ◽

Joel Bocanegra

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Empirical Evidence ◽

Implementation Fidelity ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Anxiety Symptoms ◽

Typically Developing ◽

Typically Developing Children ◽

Pilot Studies ◽

Content Type ◽

Children With Asd

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the quality of current studies that assess and treat anxiety symptoms in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). More specifically the study aimed to answer the following questions: What are the qualities of the current studies using cognitive behavioral therapies (CBTs) to treat anxiety symptoms in children with ASD? Did studies make necessary modifications and adaptations to CBTs according to the evidence-based strategies and implement these versions of CBTs with precise fidelity? Were the selected measurements appropriate for assessing the anxiety symptoms in children with ASD? Design/methodology/approach A systematic review protocol was developed from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (Moher et al., 2009). A rubric was adapted based on the CEC (Council for Exceptional Children; Cook, 2014) group comparison studies standards and the Evaluative Method for Determining EBP in Autism (Reichow et al., 2007). The 3-point Likert Scale (Chard et al., 2009) was adapted to score each study based on the rubric. Findings CBT is a first-line treatment with significant mixed results. Current studies use adapted versions of existing CBTs for children with ASD without reporting empirical evidence to these adaptations and changes. Reporting of the implementation fidelity is still an issue in the treatment of anxiety. Anxiety measurements that were designed for typically developing children failure to detect unusual anxiety symptoms in children with ASD. Research limitations/implications The first limitation of this study was including a variety of studies across CBT programs and types of anxiety symptoms. Types of anxiety and CBT treatments may require separate analyses with specific indicators. Due to the limited studies, reviews could not be analyzed across types of CBT programs. The second limitation was the types of studies. Most of the studies were pilot studies. Pilot studies might use various instruments and CBTs components for making selections to produce the best effects and results. The final limitation was the lack of examination of the data analysis process. Originality/value These findings are important because due to the variety of changes or adaptation to CBTs, inappropriate implementations and failure to detect unusual anxiety symptoms of children with ASD may cause significant differences in treatment responses and outcomes. The study demonstrated that the majority of the studies used adapted versions of existing CBTs without reporting empirical evidence for these adaptations and changes. The findings have shown that reporting of the implementation fidelity is still an issue. Moreover, the majority of studies had used anxiety measurements that were designed for typically developing children, not for children with ASD.

Download Full-text

Functional analysis methodology in developmental disabilities

Functional Analysis in Clinical Treatment ◽

10.1016/b978-0-12-805469-7.00004-8 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 75-95

Author(s):

Nienke Peters-Scheffer ◽

Robert Didden

Keyword(s):

Functional Analysis ◽

Developmental Disabilities ◽

Analysis Methodology ◽

Functional Analysis Methodology

Download Full-text

A Systematic Review Comparing the Play Profiles of Children with Special Health Care Needs with Typically Developing Children

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2020/9582795 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

Nyaradzai Munambah ◽

Reinie Cordier ◽

Renée Speyer ◽

Sivuyisiwe Toto ◽

Elelwani L. Ramugondo

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Health Care ◽

Special Health Care Needs ◽

Health Care Needs ◽

Typically Developing ◽

Sample Sizes ◽

Typically Developing Children ◽

Care Needs ◽

Special Health Care ◽

Special Health

Introduction. Although play has been used as a means to meet therapeutic goals by health care practitioners for a long time, there is a need to continuously review its conceptualisation and use in everyday practice to promote evidence-based practice. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the evidence on how the play of children with Special Health Care Needs (SHCN) is similar or different to that of typically developing children. Methods. Guided by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, we conducted a comprehensive review across five electronic databases for all studies that compared how the play of children with SHCN was similar or different to that of typically developing children. Data were extracted from the included studies, and methodological quality was assessed. Results. Eighteen studies met eligibility criteria. All the studies in this review were at risk of bias due to the study design. There was great variation in sample sizes, ranging between five and 112 participants in the diagnostic groups and five and 546 participants in control groups (typically developing children). The included studies investigated different aspects of play, which made it difficult to synthesise. However, of the 18 studies reviewed, thirteen reported that children with SHCN engage in less play, compared with typically developing children. Conclusions. Evidence supports the assumption that children with SHCN are less playful and spend less time engaging in play compared with typically developing children. This systematic review reveals paucity of research on play for children with several common chronic conditions such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, and cardiovascular diseases. Future studies need to reduce risks of bias, including the use of appropriate sample sizes, and must provide detailed results after investigating play in children with SHCN.

Download Full-text