Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Tag: 2017 wikitext editor
66.244.121.212 (talk)
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 62: Line 62:


Nonetheless, one study published in the ''Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabillities'' in 2013 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22733301/) showed that while children with ASD who have lower receptive language skills (aka the ones who don't respond from naturalistic Mand (request) training) only learn speech from DTT, those with higher receptive language skills learn speech more rapidly from the less intensive, naturalistic play-based form of ABA (see [[natural language procedures]] and [[pivotal response treatment]]). More recent randomized comparison studies (the second of which was rather large in sample size) are even revealing that the vast majority on the autism spectrum have higher receptive language skills since they are learning speech faster from the naturalistic, play-based form of ABA (i.e., see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194254/ and https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/144/3/e20190178). So, I don't know why there are some on here arguing against DTT's effectiveness as it is still an evidence-based practice like are all other ABA-based methodologies. [[User:ATC|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''ATC'''</span>]]<sup> '''.''' [[User talk:ATC|Talk]]</sup> 19:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Nonetheless, one study published in the ''Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabillities'' in 2013 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22733301/) showed that while children with ASD who have lower receptive language skills (aka the ones who don't respond from naturalistic Mand (request) training) only learn speech from DTT, those with higher receptive language skills learn speech more rapidly from the less intensive, naturalistic play-based form of ABA (see [[natural language procedures]] and [[pivotal response treatment]]). More recent randomized comparison studies (the second of which was rather large in sample size) are even revealing that the vast majority on the autism spectrum have higher receptive language skills since they are learning speech faster from the naturalistic, play-based form of ABA (i.e., see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194254/ and https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/144/3/e20190178). So, I don't know why there are some on here arguing against DTT's effectiveness as it is still an evidence-based practice like are all other ABA-based methodologies. [[User:ATC|<span style="font-variant: small-caps;">'''ATC'''</span>]]<sup> '''.''' [[User talk:ATC|Talk]]</sup> 19:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

: [[User:ATC]]: According the Cochran (which is the highest quality source), evidence of the efficacy of this method is "low", and risk of bias is "high". That's not very good for an intervention that has decades of research behind it. Since there seems to be some disagreement between sources, we need to pay extra attention to the [[WP:MEDRS]] guidelines. In particular, the American journal of mental retardation is [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=%22Am+J+Ment+Retard%22 not Medline indexed]. I'm going to go ahead and trim the sources that clearly fail MEDRS, including sources that are not reviews and the non-Medline indexed journals. Then we can continue this discussion with MEDRS sources. --[[Special:Contributions/66.244.121.212|66.244.121.212]] ([[User talk:66.244.121.212|talk]]) 00:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:06, 26 August 2020

WikiProject iconAutism C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of all aspects of autism and autistic culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

New citation

I for the life of me can not find the PMID for the Jennifer Elder citation. Pubmed has the journal and the person, but does not appear to have the article abstract itself. WLU 19:01, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move

I'm going to move the page to Lovaas technique - the current page name is out of keeping with WP:NAME. WLU (talk) 19:55, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lovaas technique

"Lovaas is a form of treatment guided by applied behavior analysis..."

"Lovaas was developed by O. Ivar Lovaas based on research performed by Lovaas and his assistants."

Are these recently made changes correct? I've never seen a research article in a journal refer to the Lovaas approach as simply "Lovaas". It's usually called the "Lovaas method," "Lovaas therapy," "Lovaas approach," or "EIBI". NighthawkJ (talk) 03:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article refers to the name Lovaas but never includes his entire name, nor has any hyperlinks to the Wikipedia article on Ole Ivar Lovaas. The first reference to "Lovaas" is in all caps, which would lead the naive reader to assume it's an acronym.drone5 (talk) 19:33, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent reliable reviews

Someone with more time than I should rip out some of the lower-quality material here and rewrite it based on the following recent high-quality reviews instead:

  • Howlin P, Magiati I, Charman T (2009). "Systematic review of early intensive behavioral interventions for children with autism". Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 114 (1): 23–41. doi:10.1352/2009.114:23;nd41. PMID 19143460.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  • Reichow B, Wolery M (2009). "Comprehensive synthesis of early intensive behavioral interventions for young children with autism based on the UCLA Young Autism Project model". J Autism Dev Disord. 31 (1): 23–41. doi:10.1007/s10803-008-0596-0. PMID 18535894.
  • Spreckley M, Boyd R (2008). "Efficacy of applied behavioral intervention in preschool children with autism for improving cognitive, language, and adaptive behavior: a systematic review and meta-analysis". J Pediatr. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.09.012. PMID 18950798.

Eubulides (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Intelligence Citations Bibliography for Articles Related to IQ Testing

I see the article mentions IQ testing of children who were treated with the Lovaas technique. I have posted a bibliography of Intelligence Citations for the use of all Wikipedians who have occasion to edit articles on human intelligence and related issues. I happen to have circulating access to a huge academic research library at a university with an active research program in those issues (and to another library that is one of the ten largest public library systems in the United States) and have been researching these issues since 1989. You are welcome to use these citations for your own research and to suggest new sources to me by comments on that page. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 23:14, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speech/language use by people with autism

The article says, "As many as 25% of individuals with autism have no functional speech, the remainder typically display pronounced phonological and grammatical deficits in addition to a limited vocabulary.[6]" This seems very unlikely to be accurate from the current perspective that "autism" includes "Asperger's syndrome" and "high-functioning autism." Asbletera (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

circular link in cost of care section

The link to EIBI in the Cost section should probably be removed because the similar existing EIBI page name is just a redirect to this article. Apologies for not knowing enough wiki jargon to say that more clearly. ;-) Claudia (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Discrete trial training. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Straw poll - merge?

Should this article content be merged to Ivar Lovaas where (per WP:NOPAGE) it might make more sense. Alexbrn (talk) 07:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • No. I will make the BLP even more difficult to edit. Since there seems to be substantial disagreement about both detail and the basic question of effectiveness, it would be easier to deal with objectively keeping it here--and, if anything , removing some of the duplication from the bio. If he were the only one practicing it I might say differently, but he's not. (this is not my usual subject area--I came here from ANI) DGG ( talk ) 04:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • No because one is about the psychologist who is a well-known researcher on the teaching methodology and the other is on the methodology itself which is being used by a number of other behavior analysts. ATC . Talk 19:03, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Effectiveness

There is decades of research on DTT (mainly single-subject designs, but even some comparison studies, and three randomized control trials, though not the largest in sample size) that proves it to be effective, as outlined by the Surgeon General (1999; see pages 163-164 here: https://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/spotlight/nn/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-101584932X128-doc), National Research Council (2001), and American Academy of Pediatrics (2007), the latter of which also indicated it to be more effective than traditional speech therapy (see here: https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/120/5/1162 and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30009626/). The Lovaas (1987) study did have some methodological limitations in that it was a quasi-experimental study (regardless, the Surgeon General called it "well-designed"), yet the results were reproduced in the American Journal on Mental Retardation in 2005 using a randomized control trial (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16212446/), which showed 48% (Lovaas (1987) reported 47%) were the best outcome kids in terms of typical language, social, adaptive, and IQ scores, as well as successful mainstreaming into first grade (the first RCT replicated study in 2000 didn't reproduce such results because it was only done for 25 hours per week (see here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10934569/) whereas the 2005 study was 35 hours and the original 1987 study was 40).

Nonetheless, one study published in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabillities in 2013 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22733301/) showed that while children with ASD who have lower receptive language skills (aka the ones who don't respond from naturalistic Mand (request) training) only learn speech from DTT, those with higher receptive language skills learn speech more rapidly from the less intensive, naturalistic play-based form of ABA (see natural language procedures and pivotal response treatment). More recent randomized comparison studies (the second of which was rather large in sample size) are even revealing that the vast majority on the autism spectrum have higher receptive language skills since they are learning speech faster from the naturalistic, play-based form of ABA (i.e., see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194254/ and https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/144/3/e20190178). So, I don't know why there are some on here arguing against DTT's effectiveness as it is still an evidence-based practice like are all other ABA-based methodologies. ATC . Talk 19:22, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:ATC: According the Cochran (which is the highest quality source), evidence of the efficacy of this method is "low", and risk of bias is "high". That's not very good for an intervention that has decades of research behind it. Since there seems to be some disagreement between sources, we need to pay extra attention to the WP:MEDRS guidelines. In particular, the American journal of mental retardation is not Medline indexed. I'm going to go ahead and trim the sources that clearly fail MEDRS, including sources that are not reviews and the non-Medline indexed journals. Then we can continue this discussion with MEDRS sources. --66.244.121.212 (talk) 00:54, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply