Suppr超能文献

智力和发育障碍个体对高科技与低科技选项的方式偏好评估:一项系统综述

Mand Modality Preference Assessments among High- and Low-Tech Options for Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities: A Systematic Review.

作者信息

O'Brien Matthew J, Pauls Alexander M, Schieltz Kelly M, McComas Jennifer J, Ringdahl Joel E

机构信息

University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA USA.

University of Iowa Stead Family Department of Pediatrics, Iowa City, IA USA.

出版信息

Behav Anal Pract. 2023 Jul 6;17(1):228-245. doi: 10.1007/s40617-023-00829-6. eCollection 2024 Mar.

Abstract

The extant literature demonstrates that individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) exhibit preferences among communication modalities when multiple modalities are available and produce reinforcement on identical reinforcement schedules. High- and low-tech communication options, such as voice output devices and picture cards, are commonly recommended for individuals with limited vocal communication skills. In this study, we conducted a systematic literature review of research studies that implemented mand modality preference assessments (MMPAs) that included both a high- and low-tech communication option with individuals with IDD. We identified 27 studies meeting our inclusion criteria and summarized the participant demographics, MMPA design and procedural variations, and MMPA outcomes. The results suggested that high-tech communication options were generally more preferred over low-tech options. However, there was a high degree of variability in how the studies were conducted and conclusions were reached. We discuss some of the current research gaps and the implications for clinical practice.

摘要

现有文献表明,当有多种沟通方式可供选择时,智力和发育障碍(IDD)患者会表现出对不同沟通方式的偏好,并且在相同的强化程序下会产生强化作用。对于语音沟通技能有限的患者,通常会推荐高科技和低科技的沟通方式,如语音输出设备和图片卡片。在本研究中,我们对实施了指令模态偏好评估(MMPA)的研究进行了系统的文献综述,这些研究包括为IDD患者提供高科技和低科技沟通方式。我们确定了27项符合纳入标准的研究,并总结了参与者的人口统计学特征、MMPA设计和程序差异以及MMPA结果。结果表明,与低科技方式相比,高科技沟通方式通常更受青睐。然而,这些研究的实施方式和得出结论的方式存在很大差异。我们讨论了当前一些研究差距以及对临床实践的影响。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
A Practitioner's Guide for Selecting Functional Communication Responses.选择功能性沟通反应的从业者指南。
Behav Anal Pract. 2022 Apr 12;16(1):65-75. doi: 10.1007/s40617-022-00705-9. eCollection 2023 Mar.
2
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 声明:系统评价报告的更新指南。
PLoS Med. 2021 Mar 29;18(3):e1003583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583. eCollection 2021 Mar.
6
Functional communication training: From efficacy to effectiveness.功能性沟通训练:从疗效到效果。
J Appl Behav Anal. 2021 Jan;54(1):122-143. doi: 10.1002/jaba.762. Epub 2020 Sep 14.
8
Language Preference of a Multilingual Individual With Disabilities Using a Speech Generating Device.
Behav Anal Pract. 2019 Jul 26;12(4):777-781. doi: 10.1007/s40617-019-00379-w. eCollection 2019 Dec.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验