Introduction to Literature Review

Search Procedure write up (Inclusion Criteria)

Nhazanu Yekeh Pessima

Graduate School College of Education, Endicott College,

ABA 585: Thesis/Capstone in ABA

Professor. Jullian & Julia

April 2nd, 2024

Search Procedure

A systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of parent and family training in behavior analysis for adolescents with developmental and intellectual disabilities, following PRISMA guidelines (Moher et al., 2009). The PRISMA model consists of four stages: (1) article identification, (2) article selection, (3) article eligibility evaluation, and (4) article inclusion. The primary researcher conducted the primary search in the PsychINFO database from the years January 2000 to December 2023. The search terms used were:” parents training OR-family training OR- caregiver training” AND- “ASD OR- Autism OR- developmental disability OR-intellectual disability” AND, “ABA OR - Applied Behavior Analysis OR Behavior Analysis." The PsychINFO search returned a total of 356 articles.

The principal investigator then reviewed the titles and abstracts of the retrieved articles.. Subsequently, the 301 duplicates found were eliminated, leaving a total of 55 articles to be evaluated. Articles that did not specifically address parent and family training in behavior analysis for adolescents with developmental and intellectual disabilities were excluded, this represented 41 articles. Therefore, a total of 14 articles were assessed for inclusion by reading the full-text of the article.

A total of six articles met the inclusion criteria. Eight articles were excluded with reason, such as not addressing parent and family training in behavior analysis for adolescents with developmental and intellectual disability (n=8?). Further explanations of the reasons for exclusion are summarized in a table. The PRISMA diagram indicates the number of articles reviewed and included (Moher et al., 2009).

Nhazanu Yekeh Pessima

ABA 585

3/31/2024

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources

Step 1: Identification of studies via databases

2.Articles removed before screening: Number of Duplicates removed (n = 301)

1. Articles identified from

APA PsycInfo (n = 356)

Name:

Topic:

Complete the following diagram. Put numbers in boxes on left where it states (n= put numbers there) for example (n=12)

Box 1 should have the total articles pulled from your search. Box 2, you note how many were duplicates from your original search.

Box 3 equals the number from the original search minus the duplicates (how many are left for screening titles and abstracts).

Box 4 equals how many articles you removed from screening titles and abstracts

Box 5 equals Box 3 minus Box 4 (how many are left for full text retrieval).

Box 6 is how many articles you removed because the library could not access them after you emailed them (should be less than 5 at all times preferably 0).

Box 7 equals Box 5 minus Box 6 (how many articles left for full text review)

Box 8 is how many articles you remove after full text review as it does not fit all your inclusion criteria

Box 9 is Box 7 minus Box 8 (how many articles you will be keeping and including in your review).

Identification

3. Articles screened (titles and abstracts)

(n = 55)

4. Articles excluded

(n = 41)

5. Articles sought for retrieval (full text review)

(n = 14)

6. Articles not retrieved (articles not available from library)

(n = 0)

Screening

7. Articles assessed for full text eligibility

(n = 14)

8. Articles excluded with reason

(n= 8)

9. Articles included in review

(n = 6)

Included

1

A Systematic Literature Review of Thesis Title

Your Name

Department of Applied Behavior Analysis, Endicott College

ABA585 (or AUT585): Thesis

Professor’s Name

Abstract

Do not indent but add abstract here- typically a sentence or two per section of the paper. No more than 250 words.

Keywords: add 3-5 keywords here about your study

Repeat Paper Title Here

Start your introduction section here- Should start with an introduction paragraph on the broad topic (i.e. autism and the deficit that is targeted in your study), then have a few paragraphs shaping the paper to your focus (each supported with research review), ending with a paragraph on the purpose of your paper. References do not need to be those that are included in the review but can be. Aim for 4 pages total for this section.

Method

Inclusion Criteria

Taken from assignment in the course with revisions provided.

Search Procedure

Taken from assignment in the course with revisions provided.

Measures

List measures here in a sentence.

Measure 1- write name of measure

Describe what the measure is and what you will be taking data on- do not include the data in the methods. See example for further clarification- pulled from measures assignment with revisions made as needed.

Measure 2 write name of measure

Describe what the measure is and what you will be taking data on- do not include the data in the methods. See example for further clarification- pulled from measures assignment with revisions made as needed.

Measure 3 write name of measure

Describe what the measure is and what you will be taking data on- do not include the data in the methods. See example for further clarification- pulled from measures assignment with revisions made as needed.

Measure 4 write name of measure

Describe what the measure is and what you will be taking data on- do not include the data in the methods. See example for further clarification- pulled from measures assignment with revisions made as needed.

REPEAT MORE MEASURES AS NEEDED

585 COURSE WORK- Skip to Reference section

Results

Number of Articles

Discuss how many articles were found within the topic of the paper and inclusion criteria

Measure 1- write name of measure

State the data found for each aspect of this measure

Measure 2 write name of measure

State the data found for each aspect of this measure

Measure 3 write name of measure

State the data found for each aspect of this measure

Measure 4 write name of measure

State the data found for each aspect of this measure

REPEAT MORE MEASURES AS NEEDED

Discussion

Start your discussion here- start with summary of findings, a few paragraphs about clinical and research implications, limitations found within the studies, limitations of the review itself, future research topics/ideas, and a conclusion. About 4 pages.

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th Ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

*Hagopian, L. P., Farrell, D. A., & Amari, A. (1996). Treating total liquid refusal with backward chaining and fading. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(4), 573–575. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1996.29-573

THESE ARE EXAMPLES- REPLACE WITH YOUR REFERENCES- not marking those in the review with an * as noted at the top of the reference section

Figure 1

PRISMA diagram

INSERT YOURS HERE

Table 1

Summary of reason for articles excluded from further review

OPTIONAL- REPLACE WITH YOURS IF YOU CHOOSE

Table 2

Measures assessed across included studies.

ADD YOUR MEASURES TABLE HERE

Nhazanu Yekeh Pessima

ABA 585: Additional Sources Assignment

PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of databases, registers and other sources

Step 2: Identification of new studies via other methods

10. Additional articles identified from:

Citation searching (n = 2 )

Name:

Topic:

Review the reference section of each included article (from Box 9 on previous assignment) using the same process as the initial database search.

Box 10 includes any articles that you screened from the reference sections that may apply to your review based on the title and abstract of the article (this number should not include any articles that were already included in your previous flow diagram from the database search).

Box 11 is the same number as Box 10.

Box 12 equals articles the number of articles the library could not get for you after you emailed them (should be less than 5 when combined with Box 6 from previous full text assignment.

Box 13 equals Box 11 minus Box 12 (full text articles you will review for inclusion).

Box 14 equals the number of full text articles removed as they do not meet your inclusion criteria.

Box 15 on this chart equals Box 13 minus Box 14. (this number will be added to your Box 9 on the next page – the combined flow chart from full text assignment and additional references).

Then complete the final diagram that combines both searches (this one is used in your thesis document). All numbers will be the same as your previous flow diagrams except the final included box at the end will be Box 9 and Box 15 added together.

Identification

12. Articles not retrieved (articles not available from library)

(n = 0)

11. Articles sought for retrieval (full text review)

(n = 2)

Screening

13. Articles assessed for eligibility

(n =2)

14. Reports excluded with reason (n=2)

15. Articles included in review

(n = 0)

Included

Adapted from: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/

Step 2: Identification of new studies via other methods

Step 1: Identification of studies via databases and registers

Novel articles identified from:

Citation searching (n = 2 )

Articles removed before screening: Number of Duplicates removed (n =301 )

Articles identified from

APA PsycInfo (n = 356)

Identification

Articles screened (titles and abstracts)

(n = 55)

Articles excluded

(n = 41)

Articles not retrieved (articles not available from library)

(n = 0)

Articles sought for retrieval (full text review)

(n = 2)

Articles sought for retrieval (full text review)

(n =14)

Articles not retrieved (articles not available from library)

(n = 0)

Screening

Articles assessed for eligibility

(n = 2)

Reports excluded with reason (n= 2 )

Articles assessed for full text eligibility

(n =14)

Articles excluded with reason

(n= 8 )

Articles included in review

(n = 6 )

Included

Adapted from: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/