How to Systematically Evaluate Treatments for Autism That Lack an Evidence Base
With over 400 treatments for autism, behavior analysts are sometimes placed in a position where they must monitor the effects of alternative or ancillary treatments that lack an evidence base. Behavior analysts must be mindful about how they evaluate treatments that lack an evidence base in order to determine whether or not they produce desired outcomes. This presentation will provide an overview of research methods to evaluate such treatments and will highlight notable research studies that evaluated questionable treatments (e.g., weighted vests and sensory integration) for individuals with autism.
Presented at the 2016 Michigan Autism Conference
Matthew T. Brodhead, Ph.D., BCBA-D, is an Assistant Professor at Michigan State University. His research examines the behavioral determinants of response variability and decision-making in children with autism. He is also interested in research and conceptual issues relating to the ethical and professional behaviors of practicing behavior analysts. Through workshops and consultation, he has established multiple school-based programs for children with autism, and he has provided training to teachers, related service providers, and behavior analysts throughout the United States.