Sofronoff et al., 2002

Study DescriptionInterventionInclusion/Exclusion
Criteria/Population
Baseline MeasuresOutcomes
Author:
Sofronoff et al., 2002
Country:
Australia

Practice setting:
Academic

Intervention setting:
Clinic
Enrollment period:
NR
Funding:
NR
Author industry relationship disclosures:
NR
Design:
Prospective cohort study

Note: see related paper with overlapping participants, Sofronoff 2004 {#814}

Intervention:
Parent Management Training (PMT)
Workshop: attended a 1-day workshop
Individual: Six weekly sessions
Both groups followed manual with six components (1 hour each) including psychoeducation, comic strip conversations (Gray, 1994a), social stories (Gray, 1994b), management of behavior problems, management of rigid behaviors, routines, and special interests, and anxiety management

Groups:
G1: Workshop
G2: Individual
G3: Wait-list

Assessment:
ECBI (Eyeberg Child behavior Inventory)

Parental self-efficacy Questionnaire

Used at 3 time points, pre-intervention (T1), 4 weeks Post (T2) and 3 months follow-up (T3)

Provider:
  • Clinical psychologist
Measure of treatment fidelity reported:
No

Co-interventions held stable during treatment:
NR

Concomitant therapies:
NR
Inclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria: Age, mean/years (range):
G1: 8.25 (6–12)

Gender:
NR

Race/ethnicity:
NR

SES:
Maternal education: NR
Household income: NR

Diagnostic approach:
In Study (method):
DSM-IV criteria; diagnosis of Asperger syndrome by pediatrician and psychologist at clinic site

Diagnostic category:
NR

Other characteristics:
NR
Child problem behaviors:
Number of reported problem behaviors by graphical illustration only

Parental self-efficacy, mean ± SD:
G1:
Combined: 2.89 ± 0.84
G1a: 3.03 ± 0.79
G1b: 2.75 ± 0.88

G2:
Combined: 2.79 ± 0.9
G2a: 2.61 ± 0.95
G2b: 2.97 ± 0.83

G3:
Combined: 3.23 ± 0.89
G3a: 3.21 ± 1.13
G3b: 3.25 ± 0.62
Child problem behaviors:
Number of reported problem behaviors by graphical illustration only

Main effect for Time (F=16.98, P < 0.0001)

Significant reduction in problem behaviors between T1 & T2 (P < 0.001) for both G1 & G2 & T1 & T3 (P < 0.002)
No significant difference between G1 & G2
Significant time × group interaction (F=8.28, P < 0.001)

Parental self-efficacy, mean ± SD:
Time 3:
G1:
Combined: 3.26 ± 0.77
G1a: 3.78 ± 0.42
G1b: 2.94 ± 0.79
G1a & G1b significantly different from T1
(P < 0.05)
G2:
Combined: 3.47 ± 0.67
G2a: 3.65 ± 0.76
G2b: 3.29 ± 0.58
G1a & G1b significantly different from T1
(P < 0.05)
G3:
Combined: NR
G3a: NR
G3b: NR
N at enrollment:
G1a: 17 mothers
G1b: 16 fathers
G2a: 18 mothers
G2b: 18 fathers
G3a: 10 mothers
G3b: 10 fathers
N at follow-up:
G1a: 17 mothers
G1b: 16 fathers
G2a: 18 mothers
G2b: 18 fathers
G3a: 10 mothers
G3b: 10 fathers
Harms:
NR

Modifiers:
List reported

From: Appendix C, Evidence Tables

Cover of Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders
Therapies for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorders.
Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 26.
Warren Z, Veenstra-VanderWeele J, Stone W, et al.

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.