Skip to main content
. 2021 Dec 7;3(4):356–369. doi: 10.1089/aut.2020.0038

Table 3.

Evaluation of Evidence Base of Included Studies

Study QI absolute coding QI weighted coding Method. sound (≥80%) n Experimental design Effect size calculated Effect (with ≥3 participants)
Allen et al.46 5.0 6.33 No 3 ABCAC withdrawal design No
Allen et al.47 5.0 5.83 No 3 AB design No
Allen et al.48 5.0 5.83 No 4 MBD across participants No
*Alexander et al.62 7.0 7.50 Yes 7 MP across participants Yes Neutral or mixed
*Bennett et al.63 7.0 7.50 Yes 5 ATD Yes Positive
*Bereznak et al.50 8.0 8.00 Yes 3 MP across behaviors Yes Positive
*Bross et al.61 7.0 7.50 Yes 1 MBD across behaviors Yes
Burke et al.49 4.0 5.97 No 4 MBD across participants No
*Cihak and Schrader51 7.0 7.50 Yes 4 ATD Yes Positive
*Cullen et al.54 7.0 7.50 Yes 1 MP across tasks and participants Yes
English et al.55 5.0 6.33 No 3 MP across skills No
*Goh and Bambara56 7.0 7.50 Yes 1 MP across participants Yes
*Kellems and Morningstar57 7.0 7.50 Yes 4 MP across behaviors Yes Positive
Mackey and Nelson58 4.0 6.13 No 2 MP across participants No
Rausa et al.59 4.0 5.33 No 1 MBD across behaviors No
Van Laarhoven, et al.34 5.0 6.00 No 4 Nonequivalent dependent variable design No
*Van Laarhoven, et al.35 7.0 7.50 Yes 2 Multiple treatments with reversal design Yes
*Van Laarhoven, et al.60 6.0 7.17 Yes 1 MP across tasks Yes
Van Laarhoven, et al.52 4.0 5.83 No 4 Modified pre/post-test control group design No
*Yakubova and Taber-Doughty53 7.0 7.50 Yes 4 MP across participants Yes Positive
*

Studies included in the meta-analysis.

ATD, alternating treatments design; MBD, multiple baseline design; Method, methodologically; MP, multiple probe; n, autistic participants; QI, quality indicator; VM, video modeling.