Centering Autistic Perspectives in Behavioral Intervention Discussions
NCT ID: NCT07165522
Last Updated: 2025-09-10
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
200 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2026-03-15
2028-02-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The investigators hope that this research will pave the way for creating spaces where autistic people are heard in their experiences and can collaborate effectively with open-minded ABA providers about how to advance the next generation of care and research in the field. More broadly, the investigators aim to create engagement approaches that may be used to have conversations around critical and difficult issues faced by the autistic and autism communities, as well as other marginalized communities.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Implementation of Naturalistic Developmental Behavioral Intervention (NDBI) Through Coaching Caregivers of Young Autistic Children
NCT06923553
Optimizing Social and Communication Outcomes for Toddlers With Autism
NCT00999778
Social Motivation Intervention for Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: Improving Peer Initiation
NCT02360449
Coaching and Leadership in Autism Support Settings
NCT07276750
Optimizing Outcomes for Young Autistic Children
NCT05926687
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
An urgent instance of this gap is the relationship between the autistic community and Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA)-based intervention, which is both viewed as uniformly beneficial by practitioners and enshrined in law by policymakers yet is increasingly denounced and viewed as harmful by autistic adults. This yields a growing chasm between the care that is most widely available to this population, and the willingness of autistic people and their families to engage with it - begging the question of what engagement approach can begin to bridge this rift.
One common approach to bringing stakeholders together to advance CER is to engage them in equitable shared decision-making processes. However, some evidence suggests there may be a unique value to centering marginalized perspectives to more effectively promote equity of engagement and prioritization of CER goals acceptable to the full range of stakeholders. Transformative and Restorative Justice practices offer methods for engagement that offer such centering, particularly around circumstances where some have experienced harm. Thus, a comparison of such approaches, applied to the autism and ABA debate, offers a rich opportunity to both address a pressing needed in this specific community, and identify effective methods for CER engagement in marginalized communities more broadly.
Study Aims:
To develop a Transformative and Restorative Engagement Circle (TREC) approach for centering autistic people in ABA-related CER priority setting.
To compare TREC and SEED approaches on their impacts on engagement with autistic adults \& autism stakeholders.
Utilize a partially-masked randomized control trial (RCT) to compare the TREC approach to an established equity-focused approach called Stakeholder Engagement in quEstion Development and prioritization (SEED) approach.
Evaluate the impact on measures of patient and stakeholder buy-in, agency, collective goal setting, and ongoing engagement before, during, and after participating in either the TREC or SEED approaches.
Understand barriers and facilitators for successful engagement.
To compare TREC and SEED approaches in terms of acceptability and importance of identified CER priorities within the broader autistic patient and autism stakeholder communities.
The investigators will field a national survey across the autism community, to assess the relative acceptability of TREC- vs. SEED-derived CER priorities.
Study Description:
The investigators will conduct a three-phase mixed methods study to develop and test the proposed TREC and SEED engagement approaches (EA) and examine the acceptability and importance of the ABA-related CER priorities they produce.
First, investigators will co-develop the TREC EA utilizing participatory research methods in partnership between the CAPBID Leadership Team, autistic Community Advisory Council (CAC), and partnered Transformative and Restorative Justice facilitators. This co-development process will also yield a process by which procedural elements of TREC and SEED will be matched, and quantitative engagement measures will be co-adapted for the autistic community. This phase will take six months.
Second, investigators will conduct a mixed-method embedded randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing two engagement methods, TREC and SEED. The key manipulation is that TREC centers autistic voices as an example of a marginalized patient population, whereas SEED aims to engage all stakeholders equally. 200 adult participants (100 autistic, 100 other stakeholders, including at least 40 ABA providers, 40 caregivers, and 20 policymakers) will be recruited over 1.5 years from team and partner networks, online fora, conferences, and other spaces representative of target groups. Stratified randomized based on stakeholder group and perspective on ABA appropriateness for autism will be used to assign participants to TREC or SEED. Participants will complete quantitative measures of (primary outcomes) accessibility, buy-in, trust, and collective goal-setting immediately before, at midpoint, and immediately following engagement activities; engagement quality will be measured at midpoint and endpoint. Both TREC and SEED will conclude with prioritization of ABA-related CER goals. (Secondary outcome) Willingness to engage in further ABA-related CER will be assessed at endpoint, 1-week, and 1-month follow-up. A subset will additionally complete qualitative interviews regarding barriers and facilitators to engagement, which will be analyzed thematically.
Finally, investigators will distill ABA-related CER priorities from TREC and SEED, which will then be fielded in a national American sample (n=500 adults; at least 100 autistic, 100 ABA provider, 100 caregiver, 100 researchers, 100 other stakeholders) recruited through online networks and community contacts to identify (primary outcome) differential acceptability of TREC- and SEED-derived priorities. This will take place over 6 months.
This study builds on the leadership of the Centering Autistic Perspectives in Behavioral Intervention Discussions (CAPBID) Leadership Team, a multistakeholder group of autistic people, researchers, scholars, ABA providers, and advocates working to center autistic perspectives in public discussions pertaining to behavioral interventions used in autism supports by directly acknowledging the lived experience of autistic people. The CAPBID team has been working together for more than 3 years to identify better ways to engage autistic people and autism stakeholders to advance more humane, person-centered care.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
BASIC_SCIENCE
DOUBLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Transformative and Restorative Engagement Circle (TREC)
Transformative and Restorative Engagement Circle (TREC)
TREC will be co-developed in Phase 1, to focus on ensuring the presence of at least 3 key components: 1) a listening phase (focused on unconditionally hearing the experiences of autistic participants), 2) an acknowledgement phase (in which the experiences, including but not limited to harms and trauma, of autistic participants will be expressly addressed and acknowledged), 3) a negotiation/priority-setting phase, in which participants will collaboratively identify goals for future CER.
Stakeholder Engagement in quEstion Development and prioritization (SEED)
Stakeholder Engagement in quEstion Development and prioritization (SEED)
The SEED Method is a PCORI-supported multilevel stakeholder engagement model, using a participatory framework to develop stakeholder priorities. The core premise of SEED is creating a level playing field for stakeholders, wherein participants learn how to collaboratively identify their own community's priorities, and then refine them together. It involves convening participatory Topic Groups of stakeholders, assembled based on their experience and knowledge of the area of focus (in this case, autism and ABA). It also involves additional consultative stakeholder participants to fill in key gaps in representation; this element may or may not be present in thi SEED iteration, based on the CAC-led adaptation. SEED participants convene over a period of time (adapted to the needs of the specific group, and will be matched to the length of TREC here) to conceptualize (i.e., learn how to build a conceptual model and conduct exercises to do so), generate questions (i.e., review the conceptual m
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Transformative and Restorative Engagement Circle (TREC)
TREC will be co-developed in Phase 1, to focus on ensuring the presence of at least 3 key components: 1) a listening phase (focused on unconditionally hearing the experiences of autistic participants), 2) an acknowledgement phase (in which the experiences, including but not limited to harms and trauma, of autistic participants will be expressly addressed and acknowledged), 3) a negotiation/priority-setting phase, in which participants will collaboratively identify goals for future CER.
Stakeholder Engagement in quEstion Development and prioritization (SEED)
The SEED Method is a PCORI-supported multilevel stakeholder engagement model, using a participatory framework to develop stakeholder priorities. The core premise of SEED is creating a level playing field for stakeholders, wherein participants learn how to collaboratively identify their own community's priorities, and then refine them together. It involves convening participatory Topic Groups of stakeholders, assembled based on their experience and knowledge of the area of focus (in this case, autism and ABA). It also involves additional consultative stakeholder participants to fill in key gaps in representation; this element may or may not be present in thi SEED iteration, based on the CAC-led adaptation. SEED participants convene over a period of time (adapted to the needs of the specific group, and will be matched to the length of TREC here) to conceptualize (i.e., learn how to build a conceptual model and conduct exercises to do so), generate questions (i.e., review the conceptual m
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Individuals who have had experience with Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) at any time in their lives who is:
1. An Autistic individual who experienced Applied Behavior Analysis or
2. A practitioner who currently or previously was involved in the delivery of Applied Behavior Analysis
3. Able to communicate fluently in English
4. Individuals who do not report the endpoint values on the AAPS:
1. ABA should never be used for autistic people
2. ABA is the only evidence-based intervention for autism
Exclusion Criteria
2. Unable to communicate in English
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
OTHER
La Trobe University
OTHER
Drexel University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Matthew Lerner
Associate Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Matthew D Lerner, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Drexel University
Dena L Gassner, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Drexel University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
AJ Drexel Autism Institute
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
PCORI Public Summary Page for this Project
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2507011294
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.