Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) Verbal and Physical Management Training for Parents of Children With ASD (P-CPI)
Phase: NA
Conditions: Autism Spectrum Disorder
Sponsor: Massachusetts General Hospital

Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) Verbal and Physical Management Training 
for Parents of Children with ASD (P-CPI) 
NCT03537261 
Detailed Protocol Version: 2/1/21 

1 
Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) Verbal and Physical Management Training for  
Parents of Children with ASD (P-CPI) 
Detailed Protocol Version:   2/1/21 
Background & Significance 
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is currently understood as a spectrum of neurodevelopmental 
symptoms, including deficits in social interaction and communication, as well as the presence of 
restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 
2013).  The overall point prevalence among 8-year-old children in the United States is currently 
estimated to be 1 in 68 (with approximately 1 in 42 boys affected; CDC, 2014).  While social 
communication deficits are unquestionably considered the hallmark characteristic of ASD, associated 
challenging behaviors are both frequent and debilitating (Matson and Nebel-Schwalm, 2007).   
While the current literature defines and measures behavior problems in various ways, most studies to 
date conceptualize aggression, self-injury, and property destruction as the most impairing or severe 
problem behaviors in ASD (Doehring, Reichow, Palka, Phillips and Hagopian, 2014) and those in 
most need of acute intervention (Akram, Batool, Rafi, and Akram, 2017; Mandell, 2008; Matson and 
Nebel-Schwalm, 2007).  Not only can aggressive and self-injurious behaviors in the home cause 
serious injury (Allen, Hawkins and Cooper, 2006), but aggression has been identified as the primary 
cause of residential placement for children and adolescents with ASD (Mandell, 2008) and frequently 
necessitates police involvement (Tint, Paluka, Bradley, Weiss, Lunsky, 2017).  When patients with 
ASD require emergency department care, many families have a negative experience as emergency 
department staff receive minimal formal training and have limited experience treating those within 
this unique population (McGonigle, Venkat, Beresford, Campbell, and Gabriels, 2014).   
While many individuals with ASD who reside with a caregiver receive educational, community-based, 
and/or in-home behavioral services, managing severe problem behaviors in the home often falls on the 
caregiver(s).  Not surprisingly, Hall and Graff (2011) found that the average total parenting stress in 
their sample of 75 caregivers of children with ASD was above the 95th percentile (as measured by the 
PSI-SF; Abidin, 1995), and severe behavior is consistently identified as a primary predictor of this 
parenting stress (Beck, Hastings, Daley, and Stevenson, 2004; Davis & Carter, 2008; Hastings and 
Brown, 2002; Higgins et al., 2005).    
While researchers continue to highlight the need for more parent training and support to manage severe 
behavior problems (e.g., Bultas, Johnson, Burkett, and Reinhold, 2016; Doehring, 2014), there is a 
significant paucity of research and/or public policy on how to best equip families to manage these 
potentially harmful behaviors.  In addition, a recent survey-based study in the UK found that despite 
not having adequate training, parents frequently use physical intervention strategies to manage 
aggression and self-injury (Allen, 2006).  The same study (Allen, 2006) also found that childrens’ 
aggressive behavior results in minor injuries to family members 69.4% of the time and major injuries 

2 
 
12.5% of the time.  Existing studies almost exclusively focus on behavioral techniques administered 
by expert professionals (e.g., Doering, 2014) or psychopharmacological interventions (e.g., Carroll et 
al., 2014).  The few parent intervention studies that have been published either do not specify which 
aspects of the multi-faceted parent training were beneficial or do not include physical management 
strategies (Rundberg-Rivera et al., 2015; Tellegen and Sanders, 2014).  Only one clinical trial has 
compared parent training with parent education, finding that parents who received a 24-week parent 
training program reported greater reductions in disruptive behavior than parents who received 
education only (Bearss et al., 2015).  Despite some preliminary and emerging research, it is important 
to note that no parent-specific physical intervention training programs exist (i.e., none commercially 
available). Given the prevalence of severe behaviors in this population, the public health impact of 
relying on emergency services and more restrictive (i.e., residential) placements, and the effect that 
these behaviors have on parenting stress and household functioning, the lack of evidence-based and 
widely available parent physical management training programs is a significant omission.   
The Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) has developed an internationally recognized program designed 
to teach professionals and educators how to keep these children safe in institutional settings. To 
address the need for parent physical management training, the current study has adapted the CPI 
professional training program for parents and caregivers of individuals with ASD.  The overall aims 
of the current project are to develop a one-day CPI-based parent training program to better equip 
caregivers to manage severe behavior problems in the home, to gather initial treatment feasibility, 
acceptability, and satisfaction, and to explore preliminary intervention outcomes, including parent 
self-efficacy, family home functioning, parental stress, and a possible reduction in behavioral 
symptoms. 
 
I. Specific Aims 
 
Specific Aim 1: We will develop and evaluate a parent-based physical intervention training called 
"Parent-based Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI) physical management training program” (i.e., P-
CPI).  We will demonstrate the feasibility and acceptability of P-CPI by administering the training 
program to 30 parents/caregivers of children with ASD as part of a small, randomized pilot study. 
We wll report descriptive statistics on parental knowledge and P-CPI competency post-treatment, 
as well as summarize average Likert ratings for parental satisfaction with treatment.  
 
Specific Aim 2: We will conduct a preliminary assessment of the efficacy of P-CPI intervention. 
Thirty parents/caregivers of children with ASD will be randomized to each the P-CPI intervention 
group and a Waitlist Control (WLC) group in our pilot study. Change in outcome measures will 
be compared between P-CPI and WLC at 2-weeks, 1-month, 2-months, and 3-months post-
intervention.  
 
We will test the following hypotheses in support of specific aim 2: 
 
Primary Hypothesis 
 
Hypothesis I:  
Participants in P-CPI will demonstrate a greater increase in parental self-
efficacy in the two weeks following intervention than WLC.  Our primary 
outcome will be 2-week change (2-week score minus baseline score) in the 

3 
 
Childhood Adjustment and Parent Self-Efficacy Scale - Developmental 
Disabilities (CAPES-DD) parental self-efficacy scale total score.  The scale will 
be modified to ask about child behavior in the previous two weeks instead of 
the previous four weeks.  We will compare mean 2-week change between P-
CPI and WLC. 
 
Secondary Hypotheses 
 
Hypothesis II:  
Participants in P-CPI will demonstrate a greater decrease in self-reported 
parenting stress at two weeks following intervention than WLC.  Our secondary 
outcome measure for hypothesis II will be 2-week change (2-week score minus 
baseline score) in the Parent Stress Index – Short Form (PSI-SF) total score.  
We will compare mean 2-week change between P-CPI and WLC. 
 
Hypothesis III:  
Participants in P-CPI will demonstrate a greater increase in self-reported family 
quality of life at two weeks following intervention than WLC.  Our secondary 
outcome measures for hypothesis III will be 2-week change (2-week score 
minus baseline score) in  the Family Quality of Life Scale (FQOL) total score.  
The scale will be modified to ask about family quality of life in the previous 
two weeks instead of the previous 12 months.  We will compare mean 2-week 
change between P-CPI and WLC. 
 
Exploratory Hypotheses 
 
Hypothesis IV:  
Participants in P-CPI will demonstrate a greater decrease in self-reported family 
home dysfunction at two weeks following intervention than WLC.  Our 
exploratory outcome measures for hypothesis IV will be 2-week change (2-
week score minus baseline score) in  the Family Impact of Childhood Disability 
Scale (FICDS) total score.  We will compare mean 2-week change between P-
CPI and WLC. 
 
Hypothesis V: 
Children whose parent/caregiver participates in P-CPI will demonstrate a 
greater decrease in aggressive behavior at two weeks following intervention 
than WLC.  Our exploratory outcome measures for hypothesis V will be 2-week 
changes (2-week score minus baseline score) in the Abberant Behavior 
Checklist (ABC) irritability subscale and the Modified Overt Aggression Scale 
(MOAS) total score.  We will compare mean 2-week change between P-CPI 
and WLC. 
 
Hypothesis VI: 
Participants in P-CPI and children whose parent/caregiver participates in P-CPI 
will demonstrate improved outcomes at 1-month, 2-months, and 3-months post-
intervention relative to WLC.  Our exploratory outcome measures for 
hypothesis VI will be 1-month, 2-month, and 3-month changes in the same 
scores used to address hypotheses I-V.  We will compare mean 1-month, 2-
month, and 3-month changes between P-CPI and WLC.   
 
 

4 
 
II. Subject Selection 
We propose to recruit 60 adult subjects that complete this study. We plan to enroll 100 subjects with 
the knowledge that we will have attrition due to withdrawals and drop-outs. The subjects will be 
parents/caregivers of children who are Lurie Center for Autism patients that are between the ages of 
5-12 years, have an ASD diagnosis, and live at home.  The subjects will be randomly assigned to the 
P-CPI group or the WLC group.  Both groups will be screened and administered baseline 
measurements on parental self-efficacy, parenting stress, family home functioning, P-CPI 
competency, and child behavior.   
a. Inclusion/Exclusion 
• Inclusion Criteria: 
o Each subject must be an adult caregiver/parent of a Lurie Center for Autism 
patient with ‘patient’ defined as having at minimum one visit/contact per year 
with any Lurie Center for Autism clinician. The patient (child) must: 
 Be from 5-12 years of age (inclusive). 
 Live at home with caregiver. 
 Have an ASD diagnosis per the DSM-5 checklist confirmed by expert 
clinician (MD or PhD) at the Screening Visit. 
 Have a symptom severity score of 13 or greater on the ABC Irritability 
subscale as confirmed by an expert clinician at the Screening Visit. 
o The subject may have any primary language but must be comfortable speaking 
and reading English without translation. 
o The subject must be the self-identified primary caregiver of the Lurie Center for 
Autism patient. 
o The subject must be recommended by a Lurie Center for Autism clinician. 
o The subject must be able to attend in person the training session on the specified 
date/time/location. 
o The subject must be willing to complete the assessment measures. 
o Only one subject per family may participate. 
 
• Exclusion Criteria: 
o The subject must not have any self-identified physical limitations or disabilities 
that prevent the use of physical intervention techniques. 
o The patient (child) must not have had seizures within four weeks prior to the 
Baseline Visit. 
o The patient (child) should have no new psychotropic drug or non-drug treatments 
(including ABA and parent-training) within four weeks prior to the Baseline Visit. 
 
b. Source of Subjects/Recruitment Methods 
 
Subjects will be recruited from the large patient base of the MGH Lurie Center for Autism, 
including our affiliated Aspire and Spaulding Outpatient Center for Children (Lexington) 
divisions via direct clinician referral.  Subjects can learn about the study through flyers posted 
throughout the clinic and Lurie Center for Autism electronic media postings.  Additionally, we 

5 
 
may directly contact adults who are enrolled in the Lurie Center’s Research Registry (IRB# 
2008P001092), who have consented to be contacted about research studies for which they or 
their children may qualify, and who have children who are Lurie Center for Autism patients.  
 
Other recruitment materials will include a cover letter, the study information sheet, and an opt-
in/opt-out form.  
Those who express interest in participation will be called by a member of the research team 
who will explain the study, will answer any questions and will ensure that participants qualify 
for participation. The recruitment materials will be mailed or read to the subjects over the 
phone.   Those who did not return the opt out card may be called by the research team within 
two weeks of the mailing date.  
 
The research team will be available to answer questions from potential participants.  All 
subjects (parents) who fulfill the study criteria will be invited to participate.  No one will be 
excluded based on age, gender, race, or ethnic background.  
 
III. Subject Enrollment 
 
a. Enrollment  
Those who qualify and consent to participation will be considered enrolled and will be 
provided the study’s baseline packet.  Packets will include:  
• Welcome Letter 
• Baseline Study Questionnaires 
 
Names, e-mail addresses, and telephone numbers of the parent participants will be collected 
for follow-up contact during the study.  As part of the study data, the birthdate of their child 
(the Lurie Center patient) will also be collected to calculate the child's age.  Finally, their 
mailing address will be collected in order to mail the participants their gift card compensation. 
 
b. Informed Consent Procedures 
Informed consent will be obtained from participants by authorized study staff who have been 
certified in human research subject protection and who are knowledgeable as to the proper 
consenting procedures according to the guidelines set forth by Partners Healthcare.   
 
The informed consent process will occur via phone or in-person.  Whenever consent occurs by 
phone, subjects will be required to sign, date and return a copy of the consent form prior to 
participation in any study procedure.  A signed and dated copy of the consent form will be 
provided to all participants.  The original will be filed in a locked cabinet with the subject’s other 
protected health information. 
 
Whenever possible, those who are interested in taking part in the research will be given a 
minimum of 24 hours to review the consent prior to their visit.  However, some subjects may 
be referred to the study staff following their appointment with a clinic physician and may not 
choose to review the study information for 24 hours prior to enrollment.  Study staff will 
make clear that even if they sign the consent form, they are free to withdraw their 
participation at any time.   
 
c. Randomization Procedures 

6 
 
After completion of informed consent and the Screening Visit, participants will be randomly 
assigned (1:1 ratio) to the Treatment or Waitlist Control groups, and will be notified of their 
condition in person or via secure e-mail or phone.   
 
 
IV. Study Procedures 
 
a. Study Visits 
All Treatment Group participants will complete a packet of assessments at the Screening Visit, 
on the day of training (considered baseline assessment), and at 2-week, 1-month, 2-months, 
and 3-months following the baseline assessment. The Treatment Group will also participate 
in-person with a Follow-up Group Qualitative Interview.  
 
All Control Group participants will complete a packet of survey assessments at the Screening 
Visit; the baseline assessments within five days of the Treatment Group’s training; and at 2-
week, 1-month, 2-months, and 3-months post baseline. On the  day of the Control Group’s 
training (to be scheduled approximately 3 months after screening), the Control Group 
participants will complete the assessments related to the training (P-CPI Knowledge Based 
Assessment and P-CPI Course Evaluation Assessment).  Every effort will be made to have 
Control Group participants complete their baseline assessments in person but these 
assessments may be completed remotely for those participants unable to visit the Lurie Center 
in person within the five-day window. 
 
The measures above will be presented using a counterbalanced design in order to reduce the 
chances that the order of the measures adversely impacts the results.   
 
To help participants defray costs of travel and compensate them for their time, we will provide 
participants a total of $150.00 for their participation in the form of a check.  Compensation 
will be prorated with payment of $25 for completion of each of the following: Screening Visit, 
Training Visit, 2-week assessments, 1-month assessments, 2-month assessments, and 3-month 
assessments. 
 
b. Treatment and Control Groups 
Parents will be permitted to pursue medical care, support and/or therapeutic services as they 
typically would during study participation, except for other parent behavior training services. 
 
Treatment Group: 
The treatment group (n=30) will receive a one-day (6-hour) training in CPI’s Nonviolent 
Crisis Intervention® including the use of nonverbal, paraverbal, verbal, and physical 
intervention techniques.  The Lurie Center has worked with CPI to modify their current 
parent and caregiver curriculum to include appropriate physical intervention techniques into 
a revised workbook, CPI Training for Parents®, that will be given to each participant and 
followed during the training. There will be 3-4 trainings offered to achieve the sample size of 
30 with 6-12 subjects per group. 
Waitlist Control Group: 

7 
 
The Waitlist Control group (n=30) will receive the same one-day (6-hour) training in CPI’s 
Nonviolent Crisis Intervention® including the use of nonverbal, paraverbal, verbal, and 
physical intervention techniques 3 months after the completion of the baseline assessments. 
 
c. Parameters to be Measured   
The following assessments will be administered in this investigation based on the schedule 
outlined in Section “D”  below. All measures (with the exception of the P-CPI Knowledge 
Based Assessment and P-CPI Course Evaluation Assessment which are original measures 
unique to this study) have been selected based on construct validity and have been evaluated 
for sound psychometric properties by the investigators.  
 
DSM-5 Checklist for Autism Spectrum Disorder:  The proposed DSM-V criteria for ASD 
will be documented in the form of a checklist for an MD/PhD to complete. 
 
Inclusion/Exclusion:  A checklist will be completed to ensure all inclusion and exclusion 
criteria are met. 
 
Demographics Review:  Information such age, race, ethnicity, family status, address, phone 
number, and e-mail address will be collected. 
 
Aberrant Behavior Checklist (ABC; Aman, Singh, Stewart, and Field, 1985).   The ABC 
consists of five subscales and takes about 10-15 minutes to complete. The ABC checks 
symptoms of irritability and agitation, lethargy and social withdrawal, stereotypic behavior, 
hyperactivity and non-compliance, and inappropriate speech. 
 
Parenting Stress Index-Short Form (PSI-SF; Abidin, 1995). The PSI-SF is a self-report 
measure of severity and domain of parenting stress which includes 36 items rated on a 5-point, 
Likert scale.  The PSI-SF has been the single most utilized measure of parenting stress, 
particularly in the ASD literature (e.g., Davis & Carter, 2008; Hall & Graff, 2011).  
 
Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS; Knoedler, 1989):  This four-part behavior rating 
scale is designed to measure aggressive behavior as witnessed in the past week.  Each section 
consists of five questions, with the first section regarding verbal aggression, the second 
focusing on aggression against property, the third section measuring autoaggression, and the 
fourth section concerning physical aggression. Respondants are asked to check whether each 
statement describes the child’s behavior over the previous week. 
 
Child Adjustment and Parent Efficacy Scale-Developmental Disability (CAPES-DD; 
Emser, Mazzucchelli, Christiansen, and Sanders, 2016): A brief outcome measure in the 
evaluation of individual parenting interventions.  The scale consists of a 30-item itensity scale 
with two subscales measuring children’s behavior problems and emotional maladjustment and 
a 20-item self-efficacy scale that measures parents’ self-efficacy in managing specific child 
behavior problems. 
 
Family Impact of Childhood Disability Scale (FICDS; Trute, Hiebert-Murphy, and 
Levine, 2007).  The Family Impact of Childhood Disability Scale is a 20-item measure 
assessing parents’ appraisal of the specific family consequences of having a child with a 
disability.   
 

9 
 
V. Sample Size Considerations 
In order to allow for unforeseen difficulties in retaining or scheduling study participants, we 
assumed 10% dropout for each group when performing sample size calculations.  Based on sample 
size calculations for a two-sample t-test, 27 per group provides greater than 80% power to detect 
a standardized effect size of 0.8.  We consider this reasonable based on an effect size of 
approximately this magnitude observed for reduction of parental stress associated with an 
intervention targeting parents of children with ASD (Tellegen & Sanders, 2014). 
 
VI. Biostatistical Analysis 
Demographic characteristics and frequency of study drop-out will be compared between P-CPI 
and WLC using two-sample t-tests and Fisher’s exact test.  Summary statistics, including mean 
and standard deviation or median and interquartile range as appropriate, will be calculated for the 
P-CPI Knowledge Based Assessment score and the P-CPI Course Evaluation Assessment Likert 
ratings. 
 
To address hypotheses I-V, primary, secondary, and exploratory outcome measures will be 
compared between P-CPI and WLC at 2-weeks (hypotheses I-V) using repeated measures linear 
regression models (as implemented using SAS PROC MIXED) with score at screening, time (in 
categories, baseline or two-weeks), group (P-CPI or waitlist) and time x group interaction as 
covariates.  Our hypotheses will be addressed by testing the significance of the time x group 
interactions from these models.  To address hypothesis VI, exploratory analyses will incorporate 
1-month, 2-month, and 3-month measurements as outcomes (hypothesis VI).  All partially 
observed outcomes from participants missing data will be incorporated.  Statistical tests will be 
two-sided and conducted at the test-wise alpha=0.05 level. 
 
VII. 
Risks  
 
It is unlikely that parent-participants will be caused any legal, or social harm by participating in 
this research.  Vulnerable populations are not targeted for this project and no deception will be 
used.  The assessments completed for the study are of low risk (i.e., are not likely to elicit an acute 
psychological reaction) and the liklihood of a psychological event is low.   
 
Parent participants will be informed that the physical management training involves physical 
contact and a risk of injury is possible. However, it is important to highlight that parents already 
use physical intervention strategies to manage aggression and self-injury (Allen, 2006) without 
training, and that the benefit of how and when to utilize these physical interventions may result in 
the benefits outweighing the risks.   
 
It is unlikely, but possible that during the training that  participants could disclose child abuse in 
the context of discussing parenting skills and behaviors.  If this occurs, the group leader, 
 
 
 will follow the Commonwealth of Massachusetts guidelines as described by the 
Department of Children and Families guidelines for mandated reporting of disclosed evidence of 
suspected child abuse/neglect and the Department of Children and Families will be notified.   
 
In addition, if participants require additional psychiatric or psychological support they will be 
referred to the appropriate level of care. Further, it is possible that confidentiality of participants 

10 
 
may be breached during the training, therefore, the investigators will give a verbal confidentiality 
warning to participants at the initial group training.  
 
An additional risk to participants is likely the breach of privacy in that they must provide an e-mail 
address or a phone number to be contacted for the subsequent assessment periods.  They will be 
fully informed of the study expectations prior to consenting and will be able to terminate from the 
study at any time. To minimize this risk, all data will remain strictly confidential.  Data from 
parent-participants will be identified by a unique code number.  Consent forms will not be linked 
to data packets.  The data from this study as well as the file linking the subjects’ names to their 
unique code number will be stored electronically in a password protected file on password 
protected computers.  The only individuals with access to these computers are the IRB approved 
investigators.  If any of the results of the study are published or presented in a research forum, 
summary group-level data and individual examples may be reported.  Individual examples will be 
completely de-identified.    
 
Parent-participants may find the time commitment to be overwhelming and/or inconvenient.  They 
may also experience boredom while completing the measures.  Parent-participants will be 
informed of their right to refuse to answer any questions.   
 
VIII. Benefits 
 
It is anticipated that parents randomized to the Treatment group may benefit psychologically from 
the training.  This may include (but is not limited to) decreases in stress as well as higher reports 
of quality of life. It is possible that study results will be utilized to inform healthcare professionals, 
behavior specialists, autism communities, future research and parents themselves about the 
application of trained  physical intervention techniques for parents of children with ASD.  Results 
from the present study will be utilized by the research team to further develop a scientifically-
sound, physical intervention training for parents. 
 
IX. Monitoring & Quality Assurance 
 
As the procedures described in this protocol are unlikely to affect the safety of subjects, it is extremely 
unlikely that there would be clinical reasons for stopping the study.  However, the Principal 
Investigator will be responsible for monitoring the occurrence of adverse events.  Events determined 
by the Principal Investigator to be unanticipated problems involving risks to subjects or others will be 
reported by the PI according to the Partners Human Research Committee’s reporting policies. 
 
It will be the responsibility of the Principal Investigator to obtain IRB approval of the protocol, 
informed consent. All research personnel assigned to the protocol, including the Investigator(s), 
Clinical Coordinator(s), and study staff, will be required to complete a computer-based training course 
on the Protection of Human Research Subjects as required by Partners Institutional Review Board. 
The Study Coordinator will maintain annual documentation of continuing IRB approval.  Within three 
(3) months of study completion or termination, the Principal Investigator will provide a final report to 
the IRB.  The Principal Investigator will ensure compliance with regulations related to protection of 
human subjects, specifically including Title 21 CFR 50, 56, and 312 and Title 45 CFR 46, the ICH 
Harmonized Tripartite Guideline for Good Clinical Practice (ICH E6 GCP) and for international trials, 
the International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects, published 
by the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS), in collaboration with 
the World Health Organization (WHO). 

11 
 
Protocol adherence will be monitored by the Principal Investigator. If protocol changes are needed, a 
modification request will be submitted to the IRB.  Protocol changes will not be implemented prior to 
IRB approval unless necessary to eliminate apparent immediate hazards to the research subjects.  In 
such a case, the IRB will be promptly informed of the change as per the Partners Human Research 
Committee policy. 
 
X. Optional Sponsor-Initiated Focus Group 
 
All participants who complete the P-CPI training will receive a recruitment letter in the mail offering 
an opportunity to take part in a focus group. This focus group will be run by the sponsor or a third-
party delegate, and the goal will be to better understand parent feedback about the training and 
what an ideal parent training would look like. The focus group will be conducted virtually via 
Microsoft Teams. It will run for about 90 minutes. Parents may also be asked to complete a brief 
initial survey. The focus group questions will center on: timing and logistics of an ideal offering, 
desire for virtual options, the perceived value of the training, and whether parents would want 
refreshers or ongoing communication.  
If parents wish to participate in the focus group, the Lurie Center research staff will provide details 
on how they may sign up with the sponsor directly. The sponsor will work with parents to 
schedule/conduct the focus group.   
 
XI. References 
 
Abidin, R. R. (1995). The Parenting Stress Index Short Form. Charlottesville, VA: Pediatric 
Psychology Press. 
Akram B, Batool M, Rafi Z, & Akram A. Prevalence and predictors of non-suicidal self-injury 
among children with autism spectrum disorder. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 
33(5), 1225-1229. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.335.12931 
 
Aman, M.G., Singh, N.N., Stewart, A.W., & Field C.J (1985). The Aberrant Behavior 
Checklist: A behavior rating scale for the assessment of treatment effects. American 
Journal of Mental Deficiency, 89(1985), 485-491. 
 
Allen, D., Hawkins, S., & Cooper, Viv.  (2006).  Parents’ use of physical intervention in the 
management of their children’s severe challenging behavior.  Journal of Applied 
Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 19, 356-363. 
 
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders 
(5th ed.). Arlington, VA:  American Psychiatric Publishing. 
Beach Center on Disability. (2012) . The Family Quality of Life Scale (FQOL). Measurement 
Instrument Database for the Social Science. Retrieved from www.midss.ie 
 
Beck, A., Hastings, R. P., Daley, D., & Stevenson, J. (2004). Pro-social behaviour and behaviour 
problems independently predict maternal stress. Journal of Intellectual and 
Developmental Disability, 29(4), 339-349. 

12 
 
 
Bearss, K., Johnson, C., Smith, T., Lecavalier, L., Swiezy, N., Aman, M., … Scahill, L. (2015).  
Effect of parent training vs. parent education on behavioral problems in children with 
autism spectrum disorder.  Journal of the American Medical Association, 313(15), 
1524-1533.  doi:  10.1001/jama.2015.3150. 
 
Bultas, M. W., Johnson, N. L., Burkett, K., & Reinhold, J. (2016). Translating research to 
practice for children with autism spectrum disorder: Part 2: Behavior management in 
home and health care settings. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 30(1), 27-37. 
doi:10.1016/j.pedhc.2015.09.009 
 
Carroll, D., Hallett, V., McDougle, C. J., Aman, M. G., McCracken, J. T., Tierney, E., & ... 
Scahill, L. (2014). Examination of aggression and self-injury in children with autism 
spectrum disorders and serious behavioral problems. Child And Adolescent Psychiatric 
Clinics Of North America, 23(1), 57-72. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2013.08.002 
 
CDC.  (2014). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years - Autism 
and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 11 Sites, United States, 20010.  
MMWR, 63(SS02), 1-21. 
 
CPI. (2006 (reprinted 2013). Sharing strategies from the nonviolent crisis intervention® training 
program; A workshop for Parents and Caregivers. Participant workbook, 23-24. 
 
Davis, N.O. & Carter, A.S. (2008).  Parenting stress in mothers and fathers of toddlers with 
autism spectrum disorders:  Associations with child characteristics.  Journal of Autism 
and Developmental Disorders, 38, 1278-1291. doi: 10.1007/s10803-007-0512-z 
Doehring, P., Reichow, B., Palka, T., Phillips, C., & Hagopian, L. (2014). Behavioral approaches 
to managing severe problem behaviors in children with autism spectrum and related 
developmental disorders: A descriptive analysis. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric 
Clinics Of North America, 23(1), 25-40. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2013.08.001 
Emser, T.S., Mazzucchelli, T.G., Christiansen, H. & Sanders, M.R. (2016).  Child Adjustment 
and Parent Efficacy Scale-Developmental Disability (CAPES-DD):  First psychometric 
evaluation of a new child and parenting assessment tool for children with 
developmental disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 53-54, 158-177. doi: 
10.1016/j.ridd.2015.09.006  
Hall, H.R. & Graff, J. C. (2011).  The relationship among adaptive behaviors of children with 
autism, family support, parenting stress, and coping.  Issues in Comprehensive 
Pediatric Nursing, 34, 4-25.  doi: 10.3109/01460862.2011.555270 
Hastings, R.P. & Brown, T. (2002). Behavior problems of children with autism, parental self-
efficacy, and mental health. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 107(3), 222-232. 
Higgins, D.J., Bailey, S.R. & Pearce, J.C. (2005). Factors associated with functioning style and 
coping strategies of families with a child with an autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 
9(2) 125–137. 

13 
 
Knoedler, DW.  (1989). The Modified Overt Aggression Scale.  American Journal of Psychiatry, 
146(8), 1081-2. 
Mandell, D. S. (2008). Psychiatric hospitalization among children with autism spectrum 
disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(6), 1059-1065. 
doi:10.1007/s10803-007-0481-2 
Matson, J. L., & Nebel-Schwalm, M. (2007). Assessing challenging behaviors in children with 
autism spectrum disorders: A review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 28(6), 
567-579. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2006.08.001 
McGonigle, J. J., Venkat, A., Beresford, C., Campbell, T. P., & Gabriels, R. L. (2014). 
Management of agitation in individuals with autism spectrum disorders in the 
emergency department. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North 
America, 23(1), 83-95. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2013.08.003 
Rundberg-Rivera, E.V., Townsend, L.D., Schneider, J., Farmer., C.A., Molina, B.B.S.G., 
Findling, R.L., … Aman, M.G. (2015).  Participant satisfaction in a study of stimulant, 
parent training, and risperidone in children with severe physical aggression.  Journal of 
Child and Adolescent Psychopharmacology, 25(3), 225-233.  doi: 
10.1089/cap.2014.0097 
Tellegan, C.L. & Sanders, M.R. (2014).  A randomized controlled trial evaluating a brief 
parenting program with children with autism spectrum disorders.  Journal of 
Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 82(6), 1193-1200. 
Tint, A., Palucka, A. M., Bradley, E., Weiss, J. A., & Lunsky, Y. (2017). Correlates of police 
involvement among adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of 
Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(9), 2639-2647. doi:10.1007/s10803-017-
3182-5. 
Trute, B., Hiebert-Murphy, D. & Levine, K. (2007).  Parental appraisal of the family impact of 
childhood developmental disability:  Times of sadness and times of joy.  Journal of 
Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 32(1), 1-9.