Sustainable Change in Quality of Life for Individuals with ASD: Using a Comprehensive Planning Process

Abstract

In 2009, two reports were published on the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD). One identified the prevalence of ASD as being 1 in 110 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2009), and the other cited a prevalence rate of 1 in 91 (Kogan et al., 2009). At approximately the same time, three published reports attempted to identify evidence-based practice for children and youth on the spectrum. In order to determine whether studies on interventions were scientifically rigorous, the first report, from the National Professional Development Center on ASD (NPDC on ASD, 2009), used the following criteria for articles on interventions used with individuals with ASD (excluding intervention packages): They cite (a) at least two experimental or quasiexperimental group design studies carried out by independent investigators, (b) at least five single-case design studies from at least three independent investigators, or (c) a combination of at least one experimental/quasi-experimental study and three single-case design studies from independent investigators. The authors of the second report (National Autism Center (NAC, 2009) developed a Scientific Merit Rating Scale (SMRS) that analyzed within an article (a) research design, (b) measurement of the dependent variable, (c) measurement of the independent variable or procedural fidelity, (d) participant ascertainment, and (e) generalization. Each of these elements was subsequently rated on a 5-point Likert scale with scores of 3, 4, or 5 indicating scientific rigor. The third report, commissioned by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS, 2010), sought to determine scientific evidence of the efficacy, effectiveness, safety, and availability of ASD-related psychosocial services and supports for children, transitioning youth, and adults with ASD. Articles on interventions were classified as evidencebased using the criteria adopted by the NPDC on ASD and the categories identified by the NAC. Table 1 lists interventions identified as effective in the above reports. Because one of the three documents used different intervention terminology and descriptions, we have categorized the three lists using verbiage from each report so that the reader can determine the level of overlap among the reports. VOLUME 43 NUMBER 3 NOVEMBER 2010