An evaluation of the Cygnet parenting support programme for parents of children with autism spectrum conditions

Abstract

The research reported here was commissioned by the Centre for Excellence and Outcomes (C4EO) D E D E T and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department for Education. We would like to thank all the families who took the time to complete our research questionnaires and speak to us about their experiences. Conflict of Interest statement AM was involved in developing Cygnet. His contribution to the paper has been solely the detailed description of the intervention and its development and critical revisions. AM was not involved in any of the data collection, analysis or interpretation.

Parent-Mediated Interventions for School-Age Children With ASD: A Meta-Analysis

“…The five-group design studies (Kuravackel et al, 2018; Sofronoff et al, 2004; Stuttard et al, 2016) all targeted reducing child problem behaviors. Kuravackel and colleagues (2018) reported on two unique studies, comparing a parent group receiving the Collaborative Model for Promoting Competence and Success (COMPASS) for Hope (C-HOPE) intervention through face-to-face training to a control group and to those receiving the same intervention through telehealth.…”

“…Both groups received the intervention over four 2-hr group sessions and four 1-hr one-on-one sessions offered over 8 weeks. Stuttard and colleagues (2016) examined the effects of training parents using the Cygnet intervention, which provided ASD education and aimed to reduce child problem behaviors through six weekly group training sessions. In both of these PT programs, parents were given information on ASD symptoms and their effect on behavior, and they were taught a variety of behavior management techniques, including antecedent strategies, steps for teaching replacement behaviors, and reinforcement practices.…”

“…In an effort to be exhaustive in our literature search, we chose to consider for inclusion studies using quasi-experimental designs. One such study, Stuttard et al (2016) was included in our final sample, and the lack of random assignment in this study introduces uncertainties regarding the internal validity of the researchers’ findings. Although the authors state there were no significant differences between treatment and control groups on key sociodemographic characteristics or outcome variables at baseline, the literature suggests the potential for an unknown covariate resulting in a difference between groups at postintervention.…”

“…Although the authors state there were no significant differences between treatment and control groups on key sociodemographic characteristics or outcome variables at baseline, the literature suggests the potential for an unknown covariate resulting in a difference between groups at postintervention. Therefore, we repeated our ES calculation removing outcomes from Stuttard and colleagues (2016). Excluding the quasi-experimental study, the remaining group design studies demonstrated an overall ES of 0.95, 95% CI = [0.60, 1.30], and an ES of 0.96, 95% CI = [0.56, 1.36] for challenging behavior.…”

Syndrome specific modules to enhance the Stepping Stones Triple P public health intervention

“…Parenting programmes that have been developed for specific behavioural phenotypes are mainly focused on children with ASD. For example, in the UK, there are three manualised autism‐specific parenting interventions available, including Cygnet , Earlybird and the ASCEND programme (see Stuttard et al for a description). While the evidence base for these programmes has been positive, the evaluations of the programmes to date have been limited, and more research is required to determine their efficacy (Stuttard et al ).…”