Evidence does not support the use of Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) as an intervention for students with autism spectrum disorder and further primary research is not justified

Hemsley, Bronwyn

doi:10.1080/17489539.2016.1265639

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such dangerous and questionable services exist for the treatment of various developmental and behavioral disorders; however, these tend to be marketed most heavily towards families of children diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD; Travers et al, 2016). Indeed, the range of 'fad' and pseudoscientific services marketed to the ASD population and their families has been considerable and has included practices such as Auditory Integration Training (Dawson & Watling, 2000), Sensory Integration Therapy (Lang et al, 2012), various mineral supplements and dietary restrictions (Trudeau et al, 2019), chelation therapy (Davis et al, 2013), hyperbaric oxygen therapy (Jepson et al, 2011), and Facilitated Communication (Mostert, 2001), along with its derivative, the Rapid Prompting Method (Hemsley, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of operant demand to treatment selection I: Characterizing demand for evidence‐based practices

Gilroy

Waits

Kaplan

2022

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various treatment approaches have been determined efficacious for improving child behavior outcomes. Despite a variety of evidence‐based options, consumers often disregard empirically supported treatments to pursue alternatives that lack empirical support, such as ‘fad' therapies. The choice to pursue therapies lacking empirical support has been considered a ‘gamble’ on therapeutic outcomes and this form of risky choice has historically been explained using various cognitive heuristics and biases. This report translates quantitative analyses from the Operant Demand Framework to characterize how caregivers of children with behavioral issues consume treatment services. The Operant Demand Framework is presented, its utility for characterizing patterns of treatment consumption is discussed, and a preliminary application of cross‐price analyses of demand is performed to illustrate how various factors jointly influence treatment‐related choice. Results indicated that caregivers endorsing interest in receiving behavioral parent training regularly pursued pseudoscientific alternatives as a functional substitute for an established therapy, despite explicit language stating a lack of evidence. These findings question the presumption of rationality in models of treatment choice and degree to which scientific evidence influences the consumption of therapies. This report concludes with a discussion of Consumer Behavior Analysis and how quantitative analyses of behavior can be used to better understand factors that enhance or detract from the dissemination of evidence‐based practices.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Applications of operant demand to treatment selection I: Characterizing demand for evidence‐based practices

Gilroy

Waits

Kaplan

2022

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Knight et al (2019) describes RPM as an ineffective or harmful intervention with evidence of neutral, countertherapeutic, or detrimental effects. RPM has faced considerable criticism regarding the potentially dangerous consequences of its use, specifically the potential for prompter interference to be misconstrued as organic communication from a vulnerable individual (Hemsley, 2016; Tostanoski et al, 2014). Schlosser et al (2019) completed a systematic review of RPM to examine the developer’s claims of effectiveness.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Economic Evaluation of Emerging and Ineffective Interventions: Examining the Role of Cost When Translating Research into Practice

Scheibel

Zane

Zimmerman

2022

Exceptional Children

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schools bear the burden of funding the majority of the services received by children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) with the assumption that spent resources will result in meaningful positive outcomes for these students. Interventions lacking empirical support remain popular in schools despite lacking or limited evidence that students will experience positive outcomes. Economic evaluation methods provide a useful method of understanding the time and financial influences of these interventions. This study introduces a novel use of economic evaluation methods to examine the time and financial costs associated with two popular interventions lacking strong empirical evidence of effectiveness. The results of this study suggest that implementing either emerging interventions or those determined to be ineffective or harmful can pose a significant cost to schools with varying likelihood of benefit to children with ASD. Financial risk increases when implementing ineffective or harmful interventions in the form of opportunity cost. Implications and further application of these methods to research synthesis methods to better support educators selecting interventions is discussed.

show abstract

“…Despite advances in the quality and quantity of research, autism remains a "fad magnet" (Metz et al, 2016). Practices such as facilitated communication (Jacobson et al, 1995), rapid prompting method (RPM; Hemsley, 2016;Lang et al, 2014), sensory integration therapy (Zimmer & Desch, 2012), and special diets (Whiteley et al, 1999) remain popular practice options despite either a lack of, or mixed, scientific support for their effectiveness (Hanson et al, 2007). The use of unsubstantiated, hereafter referred to as non-evidencebased practices (non-EBPs), carries potentially dire consequences for individuals receiving the practice (Matson et al, 2013;Whitehouse, 2013).…”

Section: (Mis)understanding Of Intervention Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Examination of Education Professionals’ Beliefs About Causes of Autism and Their Perceptions of Practices

Fleury

Kemper

2022

Focus Autism Other Dev Disabl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quantity and quality of research focused on autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have grown over the past several decades. Ensuring that research findings are accessible and understood by education professionals is essential for improving outcomes for individuals with ASD. In this study, we evaluated education professionals’ knowledge about ASD, specifically (a) beliefs about causes of ASD, (b) their familiarity with evidence-based practices (EBPs) and non-EBPs, (c) the likelihood of using or recommending EBPs compared with non-EBPs, and (d) the extent to which source credibility influenced the likelihood of using or recommending different types of practices. Education professionals ( N = 62) completed a paper survey. Responses on a modified version of the Illness Perception Questionnaire–Revised (Moss-Morris et al., 2002) were used to evaluate participants’ beliefs regarding causal attributes of ASD. Educators were also asked to read texts describing four EBPs and four non-EBPs. The text presentation was based on a 2 × 2 within-subjects factorial design with practice status (EBP or non-EBP) and source credibility (credible or not credible) as the independent variables. After reading each text, participants reported on whether they were (a) familiar with the practice and (b) the extent to which they would use or recommend the practice. Results indicate that school personnel were highly confident that neurobiological factors were a causal attribute of ASD. In addition, respondents were more familiar with, and more likely to recommend or use, EBPs as compared with non-EBPs. Source credibility did not significantly affect participants’ likelihood of using or recommending practices.

show abstract

Evidence does not support the use of Rapid Prompting Method (RPM) as an intervention for students with autism spectrum disorder and further primary research is not justified

Cited by 6 publications

References 17 publications

Applications of operant demand to treatment selection I: Characterizing demand for evidence‐based practices

Applications of operant demand to treatment selection I: Characterizing demand for evidence‐based practices

An Economic Evaluation of Emerging and Ineffective Interventions: Examining the Role of Cost When Translating Research into Practice

An Examination of Education Professionals’ Beliefs About Causes of Autism and Their Perceptions of Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About