A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted for articles published between 1993 and 2013 to evaluate the quality of the Visual Activity Schedules (VAS) literature using current evidence-based criteria developed by Horner et al. (Except Child 71:165-179, 2005). Authors sought to determine whether VAS can be considered an evidence-based practice by expanding on the findings from previous reviews. A total of 31 studies met inclusion criteria for the use of VAS to various behaviors to students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Of these studies, 16 met criteria for acceptable quality. Results suggest that VAS can be considered an EBP for individuals with ASD, especially when used in combination with systematic instructional procedures. VAS can be used to increase, maintain, and generalize a range of skills of individuals from preschool through adulthood in a variety of settings (e.g., general education, community). Implications for practitioners using VAS, limitations, and recommendations for future research are discussed.

Background-Population trends in patterns of alcohol use are important data for policymakers but are generally based on repeated cross-sectional surveys.

Understanding text can increase access to educational, vocational, and recreational activities for individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD); however, limited research has been conducted investigating instructional practices to remediate or compensate for these comprehension challenges. The current comprehensive literature review expanded previous reviews and evaluated research quality using Reichow (Evidence-based practices and treatments for children with autism, pp 25-39. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6975-0_2 , 2011) criteria for identifying evidence-based practices. Three questions guided the review: (a) Which approaches to comprehension instruction have been investigated for students with ASD?; (b) Have there been a sufficient number of acceptable studies using a particular strategy to qualify as an evidence-based practice for teaching comprehension across the content areas?; and (c) What can educators learn from the analysis of high quality studies? Of the 23 studies included in the review, only 13 achieved high or adequate ratings. Results of the review suggest that both response-prompting procedures (e.g., model-lead-test, time delay, system of least prompts,) and visual supports (e.g., procedural facilitators) can increase comprehension skills in content areas of ELA, math, and science. Authors conclude with a discussion of (a) research-based examples of how to use effective approaches, (b) implications for practitioners, and

Both scripted lessons and unscripted task analyzed lessons have been used effectively to teach science content to students with intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder. This study evaluated the efficacy, efficiency, and teacher preference of scripted and unscripted task analyzed lesson plans from an elementary science curriculum designed for students with intellectual disability and autism spectrum disorder by evaluating both lesson formats for (a) student outcomes on a science comprehension assessment, (b) sessions to criterion, and (c) average duration of lessons. Findings propose both lesson types were equally effective, but unscripted task analyzed versions may be more efficient and were preferred by teachers to scripted lessons. Implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research are also discussed.

No abstract