4.0 Article

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Synchronous Online Parent-Mediated Early Intervention for Children with Autism in a Low Resource Setting During COVID-19 Pandemic

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1034912X.2021.1937957

关键词

India; LMIC; parent-mediated; project impact online; telehealth

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are very few studies on tele-health models of parent-mediated interventions in low resource developing countries. This research conducted a pilot of an online delivery of an evidence-based parent-mediated intervention (Project ImPACT) for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in Mumbai, India during the global COVID-19 pandemic. The study made context and culture-specific adaptations and used a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy of the model.
Very few studies exist on tele-health models of parent-mediated interventions delivered in low resource developing countries. The global COVID-19 pandemic catalysed a pilot of an online delivery of an evidence-based parent-mediated intervention (Project ImPACT) for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in Mumbai, India. Context and culture-specific adaptations were made in program structure and a mixed-methods approach was adopted to evaluate acceptability, feasibility and preliminary efficacy of this model. Quantitative results (n = 12) showed excellent completion rates, with significant improvement in parent fidelity to intervention and child social-communication skills. Analysis of qualitative data from focus groups with parents on completion revealed that parents found the online mode convenient and acceptable, found the synchronous model of sessions especially beneficial and perceived improvements in their own parenting skills and children's developmental profiles. Though piloted in pandemic times, the results from the study have implications for future service delivery models across similar settings in other developing countries.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据